Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Eureka v. Wentworth: Further Erosion of the 'Hell or High Water' Principle

By Eric D. Gazin
May 26, 2005

A fundamental tenet of equipment leasing has been the concept of “hell or high water” rental payments. Once the lease is signed and the lessee accepts the goods, then the lessee's promises under the lease become irrevocable, especially the promise to pay rent. The draftsmen of UCC Article 2A recognized this critical element and codified it with respect to a finance lease in UCC '2A-407(1)-(2) (all citations herein refer to Uniform Commercial Code Article 2A pre-2003 revisions). A finance lease is a particular type of “true” equipment lease in which the lessee itself selects the item of equipment it wants and instructs the lessor to acquire it for lease to the lessee. UCC '2A-103(g). A finance lessor is neither the manufacturer nor supplier of the item of equipment; it is merely providing the money. Article 2A of the Uniform Commercial Code (the “Code” or the “UCC”) extends certain benefits to finance lessors, one of the most important of which is that the lessee's promises are not subject to termination, modification or repudiation; in other words, the lessee must comply with them come “hell or high water.” UCC '2A-407(2)(b).

The “hell or high water” protection of the Code is meant to ensure that the rental payments due to a finance lessor will not be held hostage by the lessee because of a defect in the equipment being financed or a claim by the lessee that the lessor breached a provision of the lease or otherwise. Traditionally, courts have viewed a lessor's “hell or high water” protection as inviolate. Under what circumstances, then, could a lessee cancel the lease and cease making rental payments, and are there any exceptions to the “hell or high water” nature of lessee's obligations? A recent case, Eureka Broadband Corporation v. Wentworth Leasing Corporation, 400 F.3d 62 (1st Cir. 2005), suggests that fraud may be such an exception.

Eureka Broadband Corporation, the lessee, was engaged in the business of installing fiber optics systems in commercial office buildings and, once installed, selling access to companies providing telecommunications services to the buildings' tenants. Eureka wished to acquire certain equipment necessary to its business and negotiated two leases, each for a term of 2 years, with Wentworth Leasing Corporation. The terms of the leases were substantially identical. As is typical in a finance lease, Eureka identified the equipment it needed and instructed Wentworth to purchase the equipment from the vendors. Eureka accepted delivery of the equipment and forwarded executed delivery and acceptance acknowledgments to Wentworth. In the meantime, the primary vendor sent its invoices directly to Wentworth (but, for an unexplained reason, the other vendor sent its invoice to Eureka).

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

Legal Possession: What Does It Mean? Image

Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.

The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions Image

UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?