Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
A condition subsequent is a philosophical and legal term referring to a defined event which terminates a proposition or a contractual obligation. [1][2] In contrast to a condition precedent, a condition subsequent brings the event (or obligation) to an end, rather than being necessary for to the event or obligation to occur. [3] [2]
A condition precedent is an event or state of affairs that is required before something else will occur. In contract law, a condition precedent is an event which must occur, unless its non-occurrence is excused, before performance under a contract becomes due, i.e., before any contractual duty exists. [1] In estate and trust law, it is a ...
This may also refer to contingent conditions, which come under two categories: condition precedent and condition subsequent. Conditions precedent are conditions that have to be complied with before performance of a contract. With conditions subsequent, parties have to perform until the condition is not met. Failure of a condition repudiates the ...
Breach of a condition will entitle the innocent party to terminate the contract. [3] A warranty [4] is less imperative than a condition, so the contract will survive a breach. Breach of either a condition or a warranty will give rise to damages. It is an objective matter of fact whether a term goes to the root of a contract.
Precedent. Precedent is a principle or rule established in a legal case that becomes authoritative to a court or other tribunal when deciding subsequent cases with similar legal issues or facts. [1][2][3] The legal doctrine stating that courts should follow precedent is called stare decisis (a Latin phrase with the literal meaning "to stand by ...
A defeasible estate is created when a grantor transfers land conditionally. Upon the happening of the event or condition stated by the grantor, the transfer may be void or at least subject to annulment. (An estate not subject to such conditions is called an indefeasible estate.) Historically, the common law has frowned on the use of defeasible ...
He married an approved wife and had a son and daughter. Sir William died on 12 May 1954, and was succeeded by his son, Sir Bruce Tuck. Sir Bruce married first an approved wife and had two sons. But in 1964 there was a divorce. In 1968 he married a lady who was not an approved wife. Now a question arises whether the settlement is valid or not.
But the precedent set by these cases is open to interpretation, potentially allowing new court cases that would restrict contraception access to hold up in court –– and set new precedent that ...