Businness Law

Appendix FContract Case MapFind three cases that show different pinch scandalizees and their remediesCase Contract Breach or Contract Formation illegitimacy RemedyBurger King Corp . v . Weaver169 F .3d 1310 (1999 )Defendant (D ) obtained a franchise from Plaintiff (P ) to set up two restaurantsP offered a franchise to a third party in the homogeneous locality . There was no stipulation in the assume that D would be given the exclusive right to clear business in the localityD complained that dishonored the peg down and stopped paying rentIssueWas thither an implied bargain of good belief and fair dealingsHoldingNoP sued D for break off of its obligation to pay rentsD d a counterclaim fors interrupt of its duty of good credence and fail dealingThe motor lodge control in favor of. D s counterclaim is deniedThere was no breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing because , nether the laws of Florida , the breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing does not existWhere the party alleged to have breach the implied covenant has performed all the express contractual stipulations in good faith andWhere the implied duty of good faith alleged to have been breach would modify the express toll of the contractIn this case ,performed the express terms of the contract precluding D from claiming breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealingCentex v Home Corp . v . BoagS . Ct . of New Jersey (1974 )Plaintiff (P ) built a tower block condominium and Defendant (D ) executed a contract to purchase a condo unit thereinThe price stipulated was 73 ,000 and D gavea check for 525 . After the signing , D gaveanother check for 6 ,870Some quantify after the contract was entered into , D s employer told him that D would be transferred to loot .

D informedof his inability to complete the purchase and ed his bank to stop payment beforebr could cash the second checkIssueIs the remedy of detail proceeding proper for the enforcement of a contract for the sale of a condominium unitHoldingNoP d a suit for specific performanceThe court ruled in favor of D . Specific performance was deniedSpecific performance is resorted to only in special cases where the vendor of accredited estate will otherwise suffer economic wound that is not adequately compensable by damages or where other equitable considerations demand such reliefIf the damage is measured , specific performance will not lieIn this case , the contract limited the liquidated damages to the amount paid at the time of the default .can only collect the initial deposit of 525 .Itoh Co . v . Jordan Int l Co552 F .2d 1228P send a purchase for mark coils to D . D sent an acknowledgement form towhich include new terms , saying that acceptance is conditioned ons submit to the new termsOne...If you want to get a full essay, dictate it on our website: Ordercustompaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my paper