Great Peace Shipping Ltd v Tsavliris (International) Ltd


Great Peace Shipping Ltd v Tsavliris Ltd is a case in English contract law which investigates when a common mistake within a contractual agreement will render it void.
It is notable for its "disapproval" of Solle v Butcher, a 1950 Court of [Appeal (England and Wales)|Court of Appeal] case in which Lord Denning had established a doctrine of "equitable mistake". Great Peace ruled that the thinking underlying Solle v. Butcher "could not stand in the face of the earlier decision of the judicial functions [of the House of Lords|House of Lords] in Bell v [Lever Brothers Ltd|Bell v. Lever Bros.]"

Facts

The defendants, Tsavliris, were professional salvors in the business of maritime salvage and rendering aid to ships in difficulty in the South Indian Ocean. Learning that a vessel named Cape Providence was in trouble, Tsavliris entered into a salvage agreement with the owners on LOF terms. Tsavliris used the Ocean Routes service to try to locate the nearest rescue vessel, and were told that there was one about 35 miles away called the Great Peace. Using London brokers called Marint, Tsavliris contacted the Great Peace's owners, and agreement was made to hire the tug for a minimum of five days. It then became apparent that the Great Peace was not 35 miles from the Cape Providence, but 410 miles. Tsavliris then found a closer tug and terminated the contract with Great Peace Ltd, who responded by suing for gross breach of contract. Tsavliris argued it was a common mistake as to the location of the stricken vessel and this invalidated the contract.

Judgment

held that the mistake was not sufficiently fundamental to void the contract. The Great Peace would have taken 22 hours to cover 410 miles, but that delay was insufficient to make performance of the contract "essentially different from the parties envisaged when the contract was concluded".
In the course of the judgment, McRae v Commonwealth Disposals Commission was approved, and Solle v Butcher was disapproved:

Comparison with the law on frustration

Lord Phillips observed that and applied this principle in his ruling. He commented further that