Scenario 5 of 6
A non-party controls the shipment obligation
Shipment is "scheduled" — not promised — and only "pursuant to instructions" from a forwarding agent who is not a party to the contract.
The situation
The shipment date passes without loading. The Buyer declares breach. The Seller answers that L5 conditions shipment on instructions from Penson & Co., that the instructions were late, and that it cannot be in breach of an obligation whose trigger a third party never pulled. The Buyer replies that Penson was the Seller's own forwarding arrangement, that a promisor cannot excuse itself by pointing at an agent it selected, and that reading L5 as a condition would make the delivery date illusory.
A promisor cannot rely on the non-occurrence of a condition that lies within its own control or its agent's. Penson was the Seller's forwarding arrangement, not a neutral third party, and on the Seller's reading it could defer shipment indefinitely simply by not procuring instructions. That reading renders the stated date surplusage, which the ordinary rule against surplusage forbids.
The document says scheduled, not "shall ship by." A scheduled date in export trade is a target, not a covenant, and the contract expressly makes shipment turn on instructions the document says will come from a named forwarder. The Buyer knew the arrangement, accepted the language, and cannot now convert an operational schedule into a strict delivery guarantee.
Weak point
L5 makes performance turn on "instructions from Penson & Co." without stating whose agent Penson is, when the instructions must issue, what happens if they do not, or whether the clause is a condition to the Seller's duty or merely a logistical direction; and scheduled is not shall ship by, so the date's contractual status is unstated.
Likely outcome
The Buyer likely prevails, on the prevention doctrine and the implied covenant. A promisor cannot rely on the non-occurrence of a condition within its own control or its agent's, and a reading that lets the Seller defer shipment indefinitely by not procuring instructions would render L5's date surplusage — which harmonization disfavors. The Seller's stronger ground is the word scheduled, which does read as an estimate rather than a promise; that argument survives even if the Penson point fails, and it is the one to press.
Proposed amendment
Seller shall ship the goods on or before [date]. Penson & Co. acts as Seller's forwarding agent, and any act or omission of Penson & Co. is attributable to Seller. Failure to obtain shipping instructions does not excuse or extend Seller's shipment obligation.
Anchored in the contract
L5scheduled May 10, 1957 pursuant to instructions from Penson & Co., New York
Read in context →