1. Why is the standard of performance relevant in contract law? When
ending a contract
necessary to identify for each contractual obligation
to see whether contract has been correctly performed or if
there is a breach
sales of goods act 1979 – discusses implied term say what
quality should be like
supply of goods act
How do you know when this standard has been breached so as to trigger a
breach of contract? When the parties have failed to comply with
their obligations
Outline the circumstances in which one party may terminate a contract by
reason of the other party's breach.
strict liability
Acros v ronaasen case
- Contract for sale of wooden staves – had to be ½ inch thick
- 1% more than ½ inch thick, more than 5/8 thick and rest
were somewhere between ½ and 5/8
- Court considered breach of implied conditions because
staves didn’t meet requirements of contract
Remore case – quality and quantity fine but packaged wrong –
fruit case, court decided it was faulty
Standard of performance for services – reasonable care and skill
court decides what is/isn’t reasonable [supply and goods act
– section 13
cutter v powell
doesn’t always have to be strict liability for goods
modification of strict liability and standard performance –
partial performance – Christy and rowe case [shipping case]
dissolve contracts – paying at beginning and paying rest later
[hedges – part payment not allowed, specified in contract] – loser
phrasing of contract, more likely court argue for part
performance
preventation of performance – colder case [plaintiff issued
to write book and supposed to receive £100 but publishers
, abandonded book series, though he did all of the research – court
held, can claim 50 guinee)
substaintial performance – person performs whole contract,
but with minor details – deeken v lee [promise to build house to
specific requirements, but were fulfilled when house being built
tender of performance – one is willing to perform, but other
is preventing – offering performance for other party to accept,
doing so because need them to accept it but if they refuse then
contract is discharged [mcdonald case – delivery date, but no
specificed time and attempted delivery sufficient for damages
Grounds for termination –
other party unwilling to perform
other party unable to perform
other party fail to perform
clear condition that is broken
standard performance not met = breach
Actual breach = happens on date of performance because first
time realise not performaing
Anticipatory = intention to not perform expressed before
Repudiatory breach = breach entitling other party to terminate,
only if repudiation concerns whole contract/important condition
When someone breachs contract – either on date or before – then
person who wants to terminate is accepting breach, can sue for
damages
can wait for performance then sue for damages
properties v heeny – how to find repudiatory breach, when look at
all circumstances objective from pov of reasonable person in
position of innocent party – it is clear
From that case is it really we need to look at two things were first
of all
apply the objective intent subjective test = what would the
reasonable person conclude in this case not what the parties
really meant because parties can take certain actions say stuff or
do stuff
but the court will not look at that they will look at the
objective intent was saying
but did they mean what does that mean when they sent that
letter
ending a contract
necessary to identify for each contractual obligation
to see whether contract has been correctly performed or if
there is a breach
sales of goods act 1979 – discusses implied term say what
quality should be like
supply of goods act
How do you know when this standard has been breached so as to trigger a
breach of contract? When the parties have failed to comply with
their obligations
Outline the circumstances in which one party may terminate a contract by
reason of the other party's breach.
strict liability
Acros v ronaasen case
- Contract for sale of wooden staves – had to be ½ inch thick
- 1% more than ½ inch thick, more than 5/8 thick and rest
were somewhere between ½ and 5/8
- Court considered breach of implied conditions because
staves didn’t meet requirements of contract
Remore case – quality and quantity fine but packaged wrong –
fruit case, court decided it was faulty
Standard of performance for services – reasonable care and skill
court decides what is/isn’t reasonable [supply and goods act
– section 13
cutter v powell
doesn’t always have to be strict liability for goods
modification of strict liability and standard performance –
partial performance – Christy and rowe case [shipping case]
dissolve contracts – paying at beginning and paying rest later
[hedges – part payment not allowed, specified in contract] – loser
phrasing of contract, more likely court argue for part
performance
preventation of performance – colder case [plaintiff issued
to write book and supposed to receive £100 but publishers
, abandonded book series, though he did all of the research – court
held, can claim 50 guinee)
substaintial performance – person performs whole contract,
but with minor details – deeken v lee [promise to build house to
specific requirements, but were fulfilled when house being built
tender of performance – one is willing to perform, but other
is preventing – offering performance for other party to accept,
doing so because need them to accept it but if they refuse then
contract is discharged [mcdonald case – delivery date, but no
specificed time and attempted delivery sufficient for damages
Grounds for termination –
other party unwilling to perform
other party unable to perform
other party fail to perform
clear condition that is broken
standard performance not met = breach
Actual breach = happens on date of performance because first
time realise not performaing
Anticipatory = intention to not perform expressed before
Repudiatory breach = breach entitling other party to terminate,
only if repudiation concerns whole contract/important condition
When someone breachs contract – either on date or before – then
person who wants to terminate is accepting breach, can sue for
damages
can wait for performance then sue for damages
properties v heeny – how to find repudiatory breach, when look at
all circumstances objective from pov of reasonable person in
position of innocent party – it is clear
From that case is it really we need to look at two things were first
of all
apply the objective intent subjective test = what would the
reasonable person conclude in this case not what the parties
really meant because parties can take certain actions say stuff or
do stuff
but the court will not look at that they will look at the
objective intent was saying
but did they mean what does that mean when they sent that
letter
