Computers, so the client had to have it rewritten.Read through the contract.
21 1,3,4,5,7
C 2b 3c 4b
E 2 c 3 a 4 d 5 b
The memo provides a written record of the meeting.
This avoids any confusion or misunderstandings later
On and gives the client the opportunity to query any of
The points mentioned.
2 Factual mistakes: Client gave a 10% discount.
Additional information: The lawyer does not know
Whether the contract with Glaptech waives consequential
Damages or not. She still has to look at the contract.
3 At this stae:e in the matter. it would be helpful if vou
could e:ive me anv documents or information which
Relate to the dispute.
Naturallv we will require a copv of the contract
Concluded with Glaptech.
In addition. it would be extreme Iv useful if vou could
provide documents indicatine: the nature and extent of
Your previous business relationship with the ferry
company, as well as anvthine: that would bear witness to
The poor quality of the faulty software program provided
By Glaptech.
The courts in our iurisdiction tend to strictlv construe
contracts between commercial parties and are e:enerallv
hesitant to award consequential damae:es unless the
Plaintiff can clearlv demonstrate that the loss was
Foreseeable to the defendant. The court will look at the
Course of dealings between you and Glaptech, as well as
Any documentation you can produce which indicates that
Glaptech could have reasonably foreseen the loss.
A 2 b 6 c 3 d 7 e 1 f 5 g 4
Use the email on page 87 as a model.
I will outline the law in this jurisdiction as it applies to the
Facts in the instant case.
Suggested answers
The issue in the instant case is whether a seller may
Sue a buyer for anticipatory breach of contract when
The buyer tells the seller that he will not accept the
Goods, even though the seller was not yet obligated
Under the contract to deliver the goods.
2 The non-breaching party in this case has two options:
Firstly, he may trust what the buyer has said and
Conclude that, legally, he no longer has to do the things
He promised to do under the contract. Secondly, he
Could continue to act as if the contract was still in force,
As long as this does not cause any harm to the buyer.
Under the reliance principle, if one party to a contract
Tells the other party to the contract that it will not
Abide by what they agreed to in the contract, then this
Other party (non-breaching party) can legally rely on
This verbal notice of intent to breach and take action
Accordingly. This principle relates to the case at hand
Because the seller has attempted to make deliveries
Under a long-term contract with the buyer, but the buyer
Refused to accept the goods on the first delivery date.
Since the contract was for deliveries over a number of
Years, the reliance principle can apply if the buyer has
Informed the seller that it will continue to refuse the
Goods for the remaining term of the contract.
The courts here have reasoned that...
Admittedly, there is a precedent stating that ...
In a leading case on this point, Judge Hand stated that...
This seems to be the majority position in this jurisdiction.
Language Focus
Date: 2015-12-11; view: 1133
|