Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Accord and satisfaction is a settlement of an unliquidated debt. For example, a builder is contracted to build a homeowner a garage for $35,000. The contract called for $17,500 prior to starting construction, to disburse $10,000 during various stages of construction, and to make a final payment of $7,500 at completion.
3. The performance may consist of an act other than a promise, or a forbearance, or the creation, modification, or destruction of a legal relation. [1] An example of this is renting of apartment. The landlord and tenant come together to discuss the terms of the exchange (most of the time, the leasing is outlined in a contract). Thus, they have ...
D & C Builders Ltd was a two man building firm run by Mr Donaldson and Mr Casey. They had done work for Mr Rees at 218 Brick Lane, London E1, coming to £732.Mr Rees had only paid £250. £482 was owing.
Specific performance is an equitable remedy in the law of contract, in which a court issues an order requiring a party to perform a specific act, such as to complete performance of a contract. [1] It is typically available in the sale of land law , but otherwise is not generally available if damages are an appropriate alternative.
Murray, 322 A.2d 630 (RI 1974) modification of a contract does not require consideration if the change is made in good faith and agreed by both parties. Hamer v. Sidway , 124 N.Y. 538, 27 N.E. 256 (N.Y. 1891) promising to not behave anti-socially amounted to valid consideration for a contract, in this case payment of money by an uncle to a ...
The parol evidence rule is a rule in common law jurisdictions limiting the kinds of evidence parties to a contract dispute can introduce when trying to determine the specific terms of a contract [1] and precluding parties who have reduced their agreement to a final written document from later introducing other evidence, such as the content of oral discussions from earlier in the negotiation ...
If a person were to accept an offer, but make a modification, then they are actually rejecting the offer presented to them and are proposing a counter-offer: Masters v Cameron (1954) 91 CLR 353. That modifying party is then the one making a new offer, and the original offeror is now the one who has to accept.
The act stipulates, in Section 13, obligations of all parties within a contract to act with utmost good faith. The New South Wales Court of Appeal case Burger King Corporation v Hungry Jack's Pty Ltd (2001) [ 27 ] was also concerned with good faith and referred to an earlier case, Renard Constructions v Minister for Public Works (1992).