Court of Appeal
Supreme Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: SMITH BROS TRADE AND TRANSPORT TERMINAL PTY LTD v PACIFIC POWER [1998] NSWCA 212 Decision date: 31 July 1998
See Attachment (PDF)
Details
- AGLC
- Smith Bros Trade and Transport Terminal Pty Ltd v Pacific Power [1998] NSWCA 212
- Case
- [1998] NSWCA 212
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Smith Bros Trade and Transport Terminal Pty Ltd (the appellant) appealed to the New South Wales Court of Appeal against a decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The dispute concerned the interpretation of a contract for the supply of electricity between the appellant and Pacific Power (the respondent). The appellant sought to recover damages for alleged breaches of contract by Pacific Power.
The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether Pacific Power had breached its contractual obligations by failing to supply electricity at the agreed rate. This involved determining the proper construction of the relevant clauses in the supply agreement, particularly those relating to the pricing of electricity and the conditions under which those prices could be varied. The court also considered whether any such breach had caused loss to the appellant.
The Court of Appeal, in its reasoning, focused on the plain meaning of the contract's terms, applying established principles of contractual interpretation. It found that the contract clearly permitted Pacific Power to adjust the electricity price in accordance with the specified mechanisms, and that Pacific Power had acted within those contractual parameters. Consequently, the court held that there had been no breach of contract by Pacific Power. The appeal was dismissed.
The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether Pacific Power had breached its contractual obligations by failing to supply electricity at the agreed rate. This involved determining the proper construction of the relevant clauses in the supply agreement, particularly those relating to the pricing of electricity and the conditions under which those prices could be varied. The court also considered whether any such breach had caused loss to the appellant.
The Court of Appeal, in its reasoning, focused on the plain meaning of the contract's terms, applying established principles of contractual interpretation. It found that the contract clearly permitted Pacific Power to adjust the electricity price in accordance with the specified mechanisms, and that Pacific Power had acted within those contractual parameters. Consequently, the court held that there had been no breach of contract by Pacific Power. The appeal was dismissed.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.