Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The case law has evolved over the years to create a number of exceptions to the rule in Pinnel's case. [4] The exceptions to the rule in Pinnel's case include: Payment accompanied by fresh consideration; [5] Prepayment of debt at the creditor's request; [2] Payment of a lesser sum at another place at the creditor's request; [2]
The term statute of frauds comes from the Statute of Frauds, an act of the Parliament of England (29 Chas. 2 c. 3) passed in 1677 (authored by Lord Nottingham assisted by Sir Matthew Hale, Sir Francis North and Sir Leoline Jenkins [2] and passed by the Cavalier Parliament), the long title of which is: An Act for Prevention of Frauds and Perjuries.
Walker Process Equipment, Inc. v. Food Machinery & Chemical Corp., 382 U.S. 172 (1965), was a 1965 decision of the United States Supreme Court that held, for the first time, that enforcement of a fraudulently procured patent violated the antitrust laws and provided a basis for a claim of treble damages if it caused a substantial anticompetitive effect.
The contract at issue was void or unenforceable. The exception to this (in equity) is in relation to estoppel or part performance. [7] Where an injunction to restrain an employee from working for a rival employer will be granted even though specific performance cannot be obtained. The leading case is Lumley v Wagner, which is an English ...
The case is the first of its kind to address alleged fraud in the Part D contracting process. Also Read: Insurance Giant Humana Stock Tumbles After Q2 Earnings Beat, Issues Sub Par Profit Outlook.
It now seems that the performance of an existing duty may constitute consideration for a new promise, in the circumstances where no duress or fraud are found and where the practical benefits are to the promisor. The performance of an existing contractual duty owed to the promisor is not good consideration for a fresh promise given by the promisor.
Foakes v Beer - an old leading case on the exception of accord and satisfaction where the debt was not in dispute; D & C Builders Ltd v Rees - where the creditor accepted the offer under duress; Pinnel's Case - where the payment of a lesser amount was to be paid before the debt fell due
Breskvar v Wall, [1] was an Australian court case, decided in the High Court on 13 December 1971. The case was an influential decision in property law, specifically the effect of obtaining title by registration under the Torrens title system, the application of the fraud exception to the principle of indefeasibility and whether Frazer v Walker [2] should be followed in Australia.