Foreseen that you would lose a customer will be extremely

difficult. So, how does this all sound to you?

Mr Anderson: Not as good as I'd have liked, but good enough.

Where do we go from here?

Mrs Hayes: Let me go through the file and read through the

contract. Then I'll prepare the complaint, which I should be

able to file at the end of next week. I'll be in touch.

Mr Anderson: Great. Thanks for your help.

Unit 7

Listening1

Part I

Sam: So, how do things look on the Keats case, Ron?

Ron: Well, Sam, let me fill you in on it.

Sam: OK. What's it all about?

Ron: Well, as you know, our client, Mr Keats, is a restaurant

Owner. He leased commercial space from the Jones

Corporation. Last year, Keats decided to sell his restaurant

Business, so he wanted to assign his interest in the lease

To a third party.

Sam: Does the lease permit this?

Ron: Yes, the lease expressly allows assignment.

Sam: So Keats is allowed to assign the lease to someone else

... but surely only with the prior written consent of Jones?

Ron: Yes, that's right. But the contract also stipulates that

Jones can't unreasonably withhold its consent to such an

Assignment.

Sam: OK, go on.

Ron: Well, then Keats sought approval for the assignment from

Jones.

Sam: Did Jones give its approval?

Ron: First they asked for personal and financial information

About the prospective buyer. Our client provided this

Information promptly. Then Jones asked for more detailed

Information.

Sam: Such as ... ?

Ron: Things like photocopies of his driving licence, passport and

Years of work history. And Keats provided all of that, too.

Sam: And did Jones give its approval then?

Ron: No. Jones deferred making a decision on the assignment.

It just kept my client waiting and waiting.

Sam: What happened then?

Ron: As you can imagine, the prospective buyer of the

Restaurant got tired of waiting and withdrew his offer.

So Keats is seeking damages from Jones for breach of

Contract and for intentional interference with a prospective

Business advantage ...

Sam: I see.

Ron: ... alleging that Jones Corporation deliberately withheld

Consent to the assignment.

Sam: For what reason?

Ron: Mr Keats believes that the reason is personal animosity

Between him and Jones.

Sam: So you're saying that Jones deliberately withheld consent

To the assignment in order to sabotage the sale - because

Jones doesn't like Keats?

Ron: That's right.

Part II

Sam: ... because Jones doesn't like Keats.

Ron: That's right.

Sam: And how do you plan to argue this case?

Ron: Well, the crucial point is the contract stipulation that

Jones can't 'unreasonably withhold its consent'. And I want

To argue that Jones essentially withheld consent for the

Assignment - deliberately withheld consent - because he

doesn't like my client. And that's surely something that can

be considered 'unreasonable'.

Sam: That sounds good to me. But how do you want to

establish that the defendant acted unreasonably? How can

you convince the court?

Ron: Well, I think the evidence is strong here. First of all, the

Prospective buyer of the restaurant has an excellent credit

rating, so Jones can't have rejected him on that account.

Sam: Good. But Jones could still assert that they were

Date: 2015-12-11; view: 842