What was the basis of the court's decision in Nickel Developments Ltd. v. Canada Safeway Ltd.?
A) Nickel was in breach of contract because it was an express term that it would not lease to another supermarket in the shopping centre.
B) Safeway was in breach of contract because it was an implied term, in order to meet the officious bystander test, that Safeway would continue to operate its supermarket in the shopping centre.
C) Safeway was not in breach of contract because there was no express term in the lease requiring it to continue operating its store in the shopping centre, nor could such a term be implied.
D) Safeway was in breach of contract because it was the custom in shopping centre leases that the anchor tenant will not abandon its business.
E) Both B and D
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q1: The test for when a court can
Q2: Which of the following could be used
Q3: Which of the following statements is FALSE?
Q5: Which of the following is NOT a
Q6: In interpreting a contract, the court does
Q7: Carol worked for All Safe Inc. an
Q8: Which of the following statements is TRUE?
Q9: A clause in an agreement states: "There
Q10: Which of the following may be a
Q11: Contra Proferentem means:
A)where there is an ambiguity
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents