The case of Naylor, Benzon, & Co., Ltd. v. Hirsch
& Son [1917, 33 T.L.R. 432] is of interest on this
point. The plaintiffs, London merchants, by three
pre-war contracts sold to the defendants, Germans
trading in Germany, various quantities of pyrites to
be delivered f.o.b. at Huelva, Spain, between various
dates during August 1914 and 1917, the times of
shipment remaining to be mutually arranged. By a
clause in each of the contracts it was provided that
in case of strikes, wars, civil commotion, accidents,
or any other cause beyond the control of either
sellers or buyers hindering shipment or delivery



Executory and Executed Contracts 141

" the deliveries may be wholly or partially suspended Con ^ets
during the continuance of the same without liability ; claused"
shipment to be resumed as soon as practicable."
The plaintiffs sued for a declaration that the contracts cases :
were dissolved as from the outbreak of war, and argued
that the strike clause provided for suspension of g 00 a s.
delivery, but that there was no suspension of mutual
arrangements, and further that the strike clause only providing
provided for suspension on the occurrence of events fors p-

*■ _ * pension

hindering delivery, and as war between the countries only,
of the parties did not merely " hinder " but made it
altogether illegal to go on with the contract the clause
did not apply. The defendants were unrepresented.
Bray J. gave the declaration asked for, as in his opinion
the position did not come within the word " hindered,"
which pointed to a delay much less serious.
