## Facts

- Albert Hochster, a professional courier, contracted on April 12, 1852 to enter Edgar Frederick De la Tour’s service as a courier starting June 1, 1852.
- The agreement contemplated three months of employment beginning June 1, 1852, at £10 per month.
- On May 11, 1852, before performance was due, De la Tour notified Hochster that he had changed his mind and would not require Hochster’s services.
- Hochster asserted he remained ready and willing to perform and sued for breach on May 22, 1852.
- After the repudiation, Hochster obtained substitute courier employment beginning July 4, 1852, overlapping the original contract term.
- A jury found for Hochster and awarded damages; De la Tour challenged on the ground that no action could be brought before June 1, 1852.

## Issues

1. Whether a clear, absolute renunciation of a contract for future performance gives the non-repudiating party an immediate cause of action before the performance date.
2. Whether, after such renunciation, the non-repudiating party must remain ready to perform until the time for performance arrives.

## Decision

- The court affirmed judgment for Hochster.
- It held that an unequivocal pre-performance renunciation may be treated as a breach immediately actionable in damages.
- Hochster was entitled to sue on May 22, 1852, without waiting until June 1, 1852.
- The repudiation excused Hochster from continuing to hold himself ready to perform under the contract after the renunciation.

## Legal Principles

- A contract to perform on a future date creates a present contractual relationship, including an implied obligation that neither party will act inconsistently with that relationship before performance is due.
- An unequivocal notice that one party will not perform when the time comes constitutes anticipatory repudiation, permitting the other party to treat the contract as breached and sue at once.
- The non-repudiating party may elect either to accept the repudiation and sue immediately or to wait until the performance date and sue upon non-performance.
- After repudiation is accepted, the non-repudiating party is released from further tender or continued readiness to perform and may seek substitute arrangements; damages remain subject to mitigation principles.

## Conclusion

The court held that a clear pre-performance renunciation is an actionable breach, allowing the injured party to sue immediately and relieving that party from waiting until the contractual start date while remaining bound to prepare to perform.


Hochster v. De la Tour, 118 Eng. Rep. 922 (Q.B. 1853)