Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Ruxley Electronics and Construction Ltd v Forsyth [1995] UKHL 8 is an English contract law case, concerning the choice between an award of damages for the cost of curing a defect in a building contract or (when that is unreasonable) for awarding damages for loss of "amenity".
Codelfa Construction Pty Ltd v State Rail Authority of New South Wales, [1] ("Codelfa") is a widely cited Australian contract law case, [2] which serves as authority for the modern approach to contractual construction. [3] The case greatly influenced the development of the Eastern Suburbs railway line. In terms of contract law, the case ...
Chandos, hired as the general contractor for a condominium project in St. Albert, Alberta, subcontracted Capital Steel to supply steel-related work for it.Before making an assignment in bankruptcy in September 2016, Capital had completed the majority of its work, and Chandos owed it an outstanding balance of $149,618. [2]
Shortly after construction was completed, Holmdene's bricks "were beginning to crumble and decompose," [1] manifesting a condition known as "efflorescence," which threatened the stability of the entire edifice. The affected walls were perforce demolished, and Roberts sued for consequential damages arising from the breach of the contract.
The arbitrator who first dealt with Davis Contractors' claim held that "the footing of the contract was removed" and therefore the original contract had come to an end. [1] On referral to the House of Lords, the Lords held that although the performance of the contract had become more onerous, it was not frustrated.
The Army Corps of Engineers signed a contract with G.L. Christian and Associates to build 2,000 housing units for soldiers at Fort Polk, Louisiana, under the "Capehart Act". Fort Polk was deactivated by the Department of the Army in 1958, and the $32.9 million construction contract was terminated by the Corps of Engineers on February 5, 1958 ...
Chartbrook Ltd v Persimmon Homes Ltd [2009] UKHL 38 is an English contract law case concerning interpretation of contracts.It creates a so-called "red ink" rule, that there is no limit to verbal rearrangement that the court may deploy to give a commercial sensible meaning when construing a contract in its bargaining context.
However, the contract contained several termination clauses, with the relevant clause being that the contract would terminate if the government started compulsory purchase action for this land; and 8 months later, the government gave Woodar formal notice of its intention to compulsory acquire 2.3 acres of the land.