Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Wickman alleged that Schuler AG wrongfully terminated their contract for Wickman to visit car makers to market Schuler's panel presses, as their sole representative for four-and-a-half years, even though Wickman had failed to make visits. Clause 7(b) said, ‘It shall be a condition of this agreement that [Wickman] shall send its ...
The word "innominate" was coined in Stephenson LJ in Wickman Machine Tool Sales Ltd v L Schuler A.G. [1972] 1 WLR 840. It is the legal principle and reasoning in Hong Kong Fir which gives the case its fundamental importance in contract law, rather than facts of the case.
L. L Schuler AG v Wickman Machine Tool Sales Ltd; M. McLoughlin v O'Brian; McPhail v Doulton; P. Photo Production Ltd v Securicor Transport Ltd; R. Ramsay principle
L. L Schuler AG v Wickman Machine Tool Sales Ltd; N. Norwich Pharmacal Co v Customs and Excise Comrs; R. R v Quick; S. Spartan Steel & Alloys Ltd v Martin & Co ...
AOL latest headlines, entertainment, sports, articles for business, health and world news.
L. L Schuler AG v Wickman Machine Tool Sales Ltd; Leduc v Ward; Lewis v Averay; Linden Gardens Trust Ltd v Lenesta Sludge Disposals Ltd; Lumley v Wagner; M.
Rainy Sky SA and others v Kookmin Bank [1] is an English contract law case concerning interpretation of contracts. The Supreme Court confirmed the principle laid down in Wickman v Schuler that, if the words of a contract have ambiguous meanings, the court will interpret it in a manner that most accords with "business common sense".
L. L Schuler AG v Wickman Machine Tool Sales Ltd; Lawrence v Metropolitan Police Commissioner; LB (Plastics) Ltd v Swish Products Ltd; Learoyd v Whiteley; Lennard's Carrying Co Ltd v Asiatic Petroleum Co Ltd; Lewisham LBC v Malcolm; Linden Gardens Trust Ltd v Lenesta Sludge Disposals Ltd; Lipkin Gorman v Karpnale Ltd; List of trials of peers in ...