KCourt of Queen's Bench, 1853draftborradorunverifiedsin verificar

Hochster v. De la Tour

2 El. & Bl. 678, 118 Eng. Rep. 922 (Q.B. 1853)

A courier hired for June, dismissed in May, who sued before June

In one lineEn una línea: An unequivocal repudiation of a contract before performance is due is an immediate breach; the injured party may sue at once and need not wait for the performance date.El repudio inequívoco de un contrato antes de que venza la ejecución es un incumplimiento inmediato; el perjudicado puede demandar de inmediato sin esperar la fecha.
RuleRegla: A definite and unconditional renunciation of a contract before the time for performance gives the other party an immediate right of action for total breach and discharges him from tendering his own performance; alternatively he may await performance for a reasonable time (R.2d §§ 250, 253; UCC § 2-610).
Why this case is herePor qué está aquí este caso: The anticipatory repudiation case for Part V (with UCC § 2-610 and R.2d § 253): a clear repudiation before performance is due is itself a breach, so the injured party may sue at once and seek other work instead of waiting idle. The professor's Oct. 28 hints already asked whether a repudiation starts the limitations clock.
Procedural posturePostura procesal: The courier sued in May for breach of a contract of employment to begin June 1; the defendant argued no breach could occur before the date of performance; the court held for the courier.

Facts

De la Tour hired Hochster in April to accompany him as a courier on a European tour starting June 1. On May 11 he wrote that he had changed his mind and would not need Hochster. Hochster sued on May 22 and, before June 1, obtained another engagement starting July 4.

Procedural posture

Verdict for Hochster; the defendant’s objection that no action lay before June 1 was overruled.

Issue

Whether a renunciation before the time for performance is a breach on which the promisee may sue immediately.

Holding

Yes. The renunciation was a breach of the implied promise not to disable oneself from performing, and the promisee could treat the contract as ended and sue at once.

Reasoning

Lord Campbell reasoned that it is more rational and in the interest of both parties that the injured party be free to find other employment and sue immediately, rather than remain idle and ready until the performance date; the defendant cannot complain of being sued sooner when he himself declared the contract over.

Rule (own words)

When the other side says plainly that it will not perform, you do not have to wait: treat it as broken, cover your losses and sue.

What-ifs

De la Tour wrote that he was having second thoughts but would decide by June: not an unequivocal repudiation; Hochster could demand assurance.
De la Tour retracted on May 20, before Hochster had sued or taken another job: retraction is effective if the other party has not materially changed position or indicated that he considers the repudiation final (R.2d § 256).
Hochster waited until June 1 and then sued: also permitted; the question becomes mitigation from the date of repudiation.

Likely follow-upsRepreguntas probables

Why allow suit before the performance date?

Because otherwise the courier would have to keep himself ready and refuse other work until June to preserve his claim; recognizing the breach now lets him mitigate and resolves the dispute.

What counts as repudiation?

A clear statement that one will not perform, or a voluntary act that makes performance impossible; doubts or expressions of difficulty are not enough, and the other party may demand adequate assurance (R.2d § 251, UCC § 2-609).

When does the statute of limitations run?

Under UCC § 2-725 a cause of action accrues when the breach occurs; courts split on whether that is the repudiation or the performance date when the injured party elects to await performance. The professor's review problem turned on exactly this.

anticipatory repudiationbreachdemand for adequate assurance (UCC § 2-609; R.2d § 251)mitigation (avoidability, R.2d § 350)

AssignedAsignado: 2026-11-10

Read the public opinionLeer la opinión (texto público). SourceFuente: Own brief from the public report as discussed in the casebook; verify quotations against the report..