...
I wonder this every time a contentious question comes up where there are several camps with opposing viewpoints and where most of the posters (no doubt including me) have no personal experience of a situation arising.
The simple answer is to look up any relevant case law, understand it, then quote it supporting your view Any opinion outside of that is probably just opinionated conjecture!
What a chore though esp with so many sockies around.
So to further that approach look up
Fundamental Breach "A fundamental breach of a contract, sometimes known as a repudiatory breach, is a breach so fundamental that it permits the distressed party to terminate performance of the contract, in addition to entitling that party to sue for damages."
and possible 'Unjust Enrichment'.
Not saying either apply in this instance and if there is a No MoO clause in the contract in question, there probably can be no fundamental breach.
Originally posted by speling bee
View Post
The simple answer is to look up any relevant case law, understand it, then quote it supporting your view Any opinion outside of that is probably just opinionated conjecture!
What a chore though esp with so many sockies around.
So to further that approach look up
Fundamental Breach "A fundamental breach of a contract, sometimes known as a repudiatory breach, is a breach so fundamental that it permits the distressed party to terminate performance of the contract, in addition to entitling that party to sue for damages."
and possible 'Unjust Enrichment'.
Not saying either apply in this instance and if there is a No MoO clause in the contract in question, there probably can be no fundamental breach.
Comment