Anticipatory Breach: An International Comparison of an Innocent Party's Right to Terminate

20 Pages Posted: 16 Sep 2021

See all articles by Dr Sara Golru

Dr Sara Golru

The University of Sydney, Faculty of Law

Date Written: February 2019

Abstract

As Lord Mustill observed in relation to anticipatory breach, ‘the common law has never succeeded in finding a solution which is both theoretically sound and capable of producing sensible results in practice’. This has certainly been the case with the courts’ responses to anticipatory breach not only in Australia but also in the United Kingdom, United States and Singapore. The common law origins of the doctrine have inevitably created a sometimes convoluted and often contradictory set of legal principles in relation to the executed contracts exception, mitigation of loss and the ‘ready, willing and able’ principle. International instruments have attempted to provide clarity to this complex area of law but their effectiveness is limited by the refusal of countries such as the United Kingdom to ratify the Convention and the reluctance of contract drafters to rely on international law. The doctrine of anticipatory breach ultimately requires revision and clarification by the courts in order to provide increased certainty to this presently highly uncertain area of law.

Keywords: contract law; anticipatory breach; comparative law

Suggested Citation

Golru, Dr Sara, Anticipatory Breach: An International Comparison of an Innocent Party's Right to Terminate (February 2019). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3905629 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3905629

Dr Sara Golru (Contact Author)

The University of Sydney, Faculty of Law ( email )

Faculty of Law Building, F10
Sydney, NSW
Australia

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
116
Abstract Views
301
Rank
355,974
PlumX Metrics