The Archive · 1926

A Ratified Alteration

I am of opinion that the refusal of the defendants (see letter of November 8, 1924, from Viadivostok branch of the Bank to Gro-det sky) to make any payment to Grodetsky until the arrival of the timber in Shanghai was a breach lof the arrangements as to the credit to be opened by them on behalf of Grodetsky and that, if there had been nothing else in the case, the plaintiffs might have treated the tempt to make a fundamental change in the conditions of the letter of credit as a breach of contract, but there fs evidence from which it'may be inferred that the plaintiffs, with 'a knowledge of the facts, ratified and agreed to the action taken by the defendants in this respect (sec evidence of Mr. Bos, and telegram of November 11, 1934, above refer Prevailing in "Vladivostok, this after the trench, by the defendans explained that, under the conditions red to).

There is also the fact that

necessary to protect the|ihe plaintiffs carried on negotia-and that it was equally necessary in the interests of the plaintiffs. Mr. Bos says that! Mr. Rodfeld agreed end stated that under the circumstances nothing else! could be done.

When Grodetsky heard of the change he at once protested by telegram of November 10, 192 which reached the defendants on November 11, Rodfeld states that!

Bos showed hm this, telegram on November 11, that he had some conversation with the latter about payment in. Viadivostock, and that on. the same day he joined in sending to Grodetsky a telegram in the following terms-— tions with the former and agreed to the issue of the guarantee of November 19, 1924, by the defend-lants through the Vladivostok branch of the Bank.

In these circumstances, I am of opinion that the plaintiffs must de taken to have waived any breach of their agreement by the defendants A further point in raised it No, 9 of the grounds of appeal that there was no evidence to support the finding of Mr. Justice Grain that a sum of Yen 4,000 to be paid by one Rowe was never paid. This ground must be inserted under a misapprehension (sec evidence of Rodfeld at p. 19 of Judge's notes).

Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.

Your account