Do you want BuboFlash to help you learning these things? Or do you want to add or correct something? Click here to log in or create user.



#contract #law #terms
The fact that the innominate term is alive and well (as is the test from Hong Kong Fir) can be discerned from a further Court of Appeal decision, that in The Hansa Nord [1976] QB 44. In this case, Lord Denning MR explained that:

The task of the court can be stated simply in the way in which Upjohn LJ stated it [in the Hong Kong Fir case]. First, see whether the stipulation, on its true construction, is a condition strictly so called, that is a stipulation such that, for any breach of it, the other party is entitled to treat himself as discharged. Second, if it is not such a condition, then look to the extent of the actual breach which has taken place. If it is such as to go to the root of the contract, the other party is entitled to treat himself as discharged; but otherwise not. To this may be added an anticipatory breach. If one party, before the day on which he is due to perform his part, shows by his words or conduct that he will not perform it in a vital respect when the day comes, the other party is entitled to treat himself as discharged.

If you want to change selection, open document below and click on "Move attachment"

pdf

cannot see any pdfs


Summary

statusnot read reprioritisations
last reprioritisation on suggested re-reading day
started reading on finished reading on

Details



Discussion

Do you want to join discussion? Click here to log in or create user.