Quiz 14: Breach of Contract and Remedies
Specific Performance: The Doctrine of specific performance mentions that fulfillment of certain terms and conditions are necessary to complete a contract. It is used a remedy when the contracting parties are in conflict over the completion of the contract and there is a material breach of the terms and conditions of the contract. For instance, it is important for a painter to complete the painting to fulfill a painting contract, any performance less than that is deemed as an incomplete performance and requires a specific performance. Facts: The company C H is a cooperative society of sugar growers and manufacturers and when their regular shipping company announced its unavailability to continue its services the company C H wanted to build its own container. It entered into an agreement with the company S to build a container for them in a period of one and three quarters of a year. In this case, the company S failed to deliver and had to pay damages based on the conditions in the agreement. It failed to deliver the ship and the company C H sued the company S for specific performance. Outcome: The company C H can recover the damages from the company S in this case based on the specific performance clause. This is because; the company C H made a special mention regarding the delivery of the container within a stipulated time. Also, the company suffered substantial damages because of the non delivery of the container in time and thus required a specific performance of the contract. Thus, the company C H can recover the damages from the company S.
There was no claim that it constituted a binding contract.it was clearly stated in the document that as signed that there is a mutuality of obligation with an adequate consideration. The decision would be Ali's alone whether to continue or not. Yes, MSGB must sue Ali for the breach of contract on the same time when Ali announces for the retirement. It is clear that with the announcement of retirement Ali is refusing to perform. This gives the reason to sue hum for the breach of contract. But as MSGB did not took any action for the enforcement of the contract, the court must take necessary actions to determine that the contract is abandoned or rescinded mutually or willingly.
Yes, Microform materially breach the contract to allow recovery of damages as it was determined by the district court that MDS (Microform data system) was unable to provide a functioning system even when the extreme drawbacks accumulated. This created a material breach of the agreement. It was clearly visible that MDS breached the contract as there was no absolute time or day for the enactment. The statement that the agreement does not contain a final date for the enactment of the contract even after the period of penalty shows the breach of contract. MDS breached the contract as it cannot take along the system up to provisions. The system at no time agreed the test of acceptance which is set out in the provisions.