Docsity
Docsity
Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity

Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan

Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips
Sell on Docsity
Sell on Docsity
Docsity AI
Docsity AI
Log inSign up

Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity

Find documents

Prepare for your exams with the study notes shared by other students like you on Docsity

Search for your university

Find the specific documents for your university's exams

Docsity AINEW

Summarize your documents, ask them questions, convert them into quizzes and concept maps

Explore questions

Clear up your doubts by reading the answers to questions asked by your fellow students

Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan

Share documents
download point icon20 Points

For each uploaded document

Answer questions
download point icon5 Points

For each given answer (max 1 per day)

All the ways to get free points
Get points immediately

Choose a premium plan with all the points you need

Study Opportunities

Choose your next study program

Get in touch with the best universities in the world. Search through thousands of universities and official partners

Community

Ask the community

Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts

Free resources

Our save-the-student-ebooks!

Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors

Advanced Contracts: Defective Performance, Study notes of Law

Law

The concept of defective performance in contract law. It covers the different types of defective performance, including late performance, non-performance, and performance that does not meet contractual requirements. The document also explores the standard of contractual duty, implied terms, and the right to terminate a contract for breach. Additionally, it discusses the concept of quantum meruit and the leading case of Pavey & Matthews v Paul. likely a set of lecture notes or study notes for a law course on contract law.

Typology: Study notes

2022/2023

Uploaded on 03/14/2023

borich
borich 🇬🇧

4.3

(26)

292 documents

1 / 7

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
1
ADVANCED CONTRACTS – SPRING 2015
CONTRACT BASICS ............................................................................................................................................... 4
DEFECTIVE PERFORMANCE ................................................................................................................................... 5
ELEMENTS OF DEFECTIVE PERFORMANCE .............................................................................................................................. 5
IMPLIED TERMS ................................................................................................................................................................. 5
STANDARD OF CONTRACTUAL DUTY ..................................................................................................................................... 6
EXPRESS STANDARD .................................................................................................................................................. 6
IMPLIED STANDARD .................................................................................................................................................. 6
PERFORMANCE: NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE .................................................................................................................................. 7
PERFORMANCE: DEFICIENT IN QUALITY OR QUANTITY ............................................................................................................... 7
INDUSTRY STANDARD .......................................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
CONSTRUCTION ................................................................................................ ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
GENERAL RIGHT TO ENTIRE PERFORMANCE .................................................................. ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
MEANING.......................................................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
ENTIRE (PRECISE) PERFORMANCE CONTRACTS ......................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
INDICATORS OF ENTIRE PERFORMANCE ..................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
WHERE THE ENTIRE PERFORMANCE RULE DOES NOT APPLY ..................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
EXPRESS PROVISIONS CREATING ‘ENTIRE PERFORMANCE’ ........................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
ENTIRE PERFORMANCE BY IMPLIED TERM ................................................................................ ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
THE DE MINIMIS RULE .......................................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
SUBSTANTIAL PERFORMANCE ............................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
CONTRACTING FOR SUBSTANTIAL PERFORMANCE .................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
WORK THAT DOES NOT QUALIFY UNDER THE SUBSTANTIAL PERFORMANCE DOCTRINE........ Error! Bookmark not
defined.
SUBSTANTIAL PERFORMANCE IS ALL THAT IS INTENDED ........................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
SUBSTANTIAL PERFORMANCE IS SUFFICIENT ............................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
SEVERABLE CONTRACTS ....................................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
DIFFERENT (BUT EQUALLY GOOD) PERFORMANCE .................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
TERMINATION FOR BREACH .............................................................................. ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
RIGHT TO TERMINATE.......................................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
BREACH OF A CONDITION ..................................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
EXPRESSED TERM GIVING RIGHT TO TERMINATE ....................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
IMPLIED RIGHT TO TERMINATE DISCERNED FROM THE AGREEMENT ....................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
THE TEST TO DISCERN A CONDITION: ‘ESSENTIALITY’ OR ‘SO IMPORTANT’ .................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
BREACH OF AN INTERMEDIATE TERM ...................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
BREACH OF AN INTERMEDIATE TERM ...................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
TEST FOR SERIOUSNESS OF THE BREACH .................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
ELECTION TO TERMINATE ..................................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
REPUDIATION OF CONTRACT ............................................................................. ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
ELEMENTS OF DEFECTIVE PERFORMANCE ............................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
DEFINITION........................................................................................................................ ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
TYPES AND PROOF ...................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
CONNECTION TO ANTICIPATORY BREACH ................................................................................ ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
BASE REQUIREMENT ........................................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
STANDARD OF CONDUCT ..................................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
pf3
pf4
pf5

Partial preview of the text

Download Advanced Contracts: Defective Performance and more Study notes Law in PDF only on Docsity!

ADVANCED CONTRACTS – SPRING 2015

CONTRACT BASICS ............................................................................................................................................... 4
DEFECTIVE PERFORMANCE ................................................................................................................................... 5
ELEMENTS OF DEFECTIVE PERFORMANCE .............................................................................................................................. 5
IMPLIED TERMS ................................................................................................................................................................. 5
STANDARD OF CONTRACTUAL DUTY ..................................................................................................................................... 6
EXPRESS STANDARD .................................................................................................................................................. 6
IMPLIED STANDARD .................................................................................................................................................. 6
PERFORMANCE: NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE .................................................................................................................................. 7
PERFORMANCE: DEFICIENT IN QUALITY OR QUANTITY ............................................................................................................... 7
INDUSTRY STANDARD .......................................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
CONSTRUCTION ................................................................................................ ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
GENERAL RIGHT TO ENTIRE PERFORMANCE .................................................................. ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
MEANING.......................................................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
ENTIRE (PRECISE) PERFORMANCE CONTRACTS ......................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

INDICATORS OF ENTIRE PERFORMANCE ..................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. WHERE THE ENTIRE PERFORMANCE RULE DOES NOT APPLY ..................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. EXPRESS PROVISIONS CREATING ‘ENTIRE PERFORMANCE’ ........................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. ENTIRE PERFORMANCE BY IMPLIED TERM ................................................................................ ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. THE DE MINIMIS RULE.......................................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. SUBSTANTIAL PERFORMANCE ............................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. CONTRACTING FOR SUBSTANTIAL PERFORMANCE .................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. WORK THAT DOES NOT QUALIFY UNDER THE SUBSTANTIAL PERFORMANCE DOCTRINE........ Error! Bookmark not defined. SUBSTANTIAL PERFORMANCE IS ALL THAT IS INTENDED ........................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. SUBSTANTIAL PERFORMANCE IS SUFFICIENT ............................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. SEVERABLE CONTRACTS ....................................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. DIFFERENT (BUT EQUALLY GOOD) PERFORMANCE .................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

TERMINATION FOR BREACH .............................................................................. ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

RIGHT TO TERMINATE.......................................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. BREACH OF A CONDITION..................................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. EXPRESSED TERM GIVING RIGHT TO TERMINATE....................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. IMPLIED RIGHT TO TERMINATE DISCERNED FROM THE AGREEMENT ....................... Error! Bookmark not defined. THE TEST TO DISCERN A CONDITION: ‘ESSENTIALITY’ OR ‘SO IMPORTANT’ .................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. BREACH OF AN INTERMEDIATE TERM ...................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. BREACH OF AN INTERMEDIATE TERM ...................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. TEST FOR SERIOUSNESS OF THE BREACH .................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. ELECTION TO TERMINATE ..................................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

REPUDIATION OF CONTRACT............................................................................. ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

ELEMENTS OF DEFECTIVE PERFORMANCE ............................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. DEFINITION........................................................................................................................ ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. TYPES AND PROOF ...................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. CONNECTION TO ANTICIPATORY BREACH ................................................................................ ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. BASE REQUIREMENT ........................................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. STANDARD OF CONDUCT ..................................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

REASONABLE (EXPERIENCED) PERSON TEST ............................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. INFERRED REFUSAL TO PERFORM ........................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. INTERMEDIATE TERMS ......................................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. TEST FOR REPUDITORY BREACH.................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. THREAT TO REPUDIATE WITHOUT INTENTION ........................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. REPUDIATION BY DENIAL OF OBLIGATION TO PERFORM ............................................................. ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. REPUDIATION OF INSTALMENT CONTRACTS ............................................................................. ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. REPUDIATION BY SUBSTITUTED PERFORMANCE........................................................................ ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. REPUDIATION BY WRONG INTERPRETATION OF THE TERM ENTITLING TERMINATION ...................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. OBLIGATIONS OF THE INJURED PARTY .................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

STATUTORY REQUIREMENT OF WRITING ........................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE STATUTE .................................................................................. ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. COMPLIANCE ..................................................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. ENFORCEMENT................................................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. NON-CONTRACTUAL RIGHTS ................................................................................................. ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. EQUITY ............................................................................................................................. ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

QUANTUM MERUIT .......................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

ELEMENTS ......................................................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. UNJUST ENRICHMENT ......................................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. INHERENTLY INEFFECTIVE CONTRACTS .................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. CONTRACT BASED CLAIMS .................................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. LEADING CASE: PAVEY & MATTHEWS V PAUL (1987) 162 CLR 221...................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. THE RELEVANCE OF THE CONTRACT ........................................................................................ ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. THE BENEFIT MUST FLOW FROM THE PLAINTIFF (BUILDER) TO THE DEFENDANT .............................. ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. THERE CAN BE NO CONFLICT WHERE THERE IS A VALID CONTRACT................................................ ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. THE PRE-EMINENCE OF AN EXTANT [LIVE] CONTRACT ............................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. THE REQUIREMENT THAT A ‘BENEFIT IS ACCEPTED’ ................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. THE BASE REQUIREMENTS .......................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. EXCEPTIONS WHERE NO REQUEST OR ACCEPTANCE.................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. THE RESPONDENT MUST RECEIVE A BENEFIT ............................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. THE BENEFIT MUST NOT BE A GRATUITY .................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. HOW DO WE KNOW THE BENEFIT WAS NOT MEANT AS A GIFT? = THE REASONABLE PERSON TEST ............. Error! Bookmark not defined. REQUESTED AND ACCEPTED BENEFITS ..................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. NON-REQUESTED BENEFITS ................................................................................................. ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. (a) IMPLIED REQUEST/ACCEPTANCE ........................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. (b) ‘INCONTROVERTIBLE’ BENEFITS ............................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined. ACCEPTANCE OF THE BENEFIT MUST BE ‘FREE’ ......................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. NO LIABILITY IF DEFENDANT ‘FORCED’ TO ACCEPT .................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. INTANGIBLE AND NON-ECONOMIC BENEFITS ........................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. DETERMINING THE VALUE OF THE BENEFIT .............................................................................. ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. THE QUESTION OF AN ‘UNJUST FACTOR’ ................................................................................. ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. RESTITUTION AND PARTIAL PERFORMANCE ............................................................................. ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

INCOMPLETE PERFORMANCE ............................................................................ ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

TERMINATION FOR INCOMPLETE PERFORMANCE ...................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. CONTRACT DAMAGES OR QUANTUM MERUIT AVAILABLE? ...................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

  1. WHERE THE BREACH PREVENTS PERFORMANCE, OR CAUSES THE PLAINTIFF TO TERMINATE THE CONTRACT ... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

Contract Basics

A CONTRACT IS AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO OR MORE PARTIES IN WHICH LEGAL

OBLIGATIONS ARE CREATED WHICH ARE ENFORCEABLE BY LAW

Defective Performance

A BREACH OF CONTRACT CAN OCCUR IN THREE WAYS:

Late performance

Contracts generally specify a time for performance; late performance is usually not a breach of contract that would allow the other party to be excused from performance. However if time is of the essence, late performance will be considered a material breach of contract. Can give rise to damages or cause the cancellation of the contract.

Non-performance

Failure by one party to fulfil their obligations under the contract Eg. not turning up to perform services/delivering goods at all. OR, where the promisee rejects performance due to non-conformity to the contract Eg. refuses to take possession of the goods/services in question.

DEFECTIVE PERFORMANCE

A breach of contract where the performance does not meet the requirements of the contract but the promisee retains the goods or service anyway. The promise is entitled to damages in compensation, the reasonable cost of rectifying the defect.

Elements of Defective Performance

Breach through defective performance occurs:

  1. where the performance is deficient in quality or quantity as per the terms of the contract (usually associated with a failure to use reasonable skill and care); OR
  2. where the performance is not fit for the purpose for which the goods or services were intended

Implied Terms

TERMS IMPLIED BY STATUTE eg. Sale of Goods Act 1923 (NSW), Home Building Act 1989 (NSW)  TERMS IMPLIED BY THE COURTS

There are limited circumstances where the courts will imply a term into a contract at common law:

1. Terms implied in fact

Terms implied as fact are based on the imputed intention of the parties. So obvious it goes without saying.

There are two tests:

The business efficacy test Was the term was necessary to give the contract business efficacy ie. would the contract make business sense without it? - The courts will only imply a term where it is necessary to do so.

The officious bystander test Had an officious bystander been present at the time the contract was made and had suggested that such a term should be included, it must be obvious that both parties would have agreed to it.

Performance: not fit for purpose

Performance: deficient in quality or quantity

NOTE: Usually associated with failure to use reasonable skill and care, may also constitute negligence at common law.

Derbyshire Building Co Pty Ltd v Becker (1962)

 Issue: Implied warranty that goods are fit for use  Facts: B (contractor) suffered injury using defective circular-saw provided by D. Was D in breach of the contract? What was the standard of duty applicable to the supply of the tool?  Held: HC found for Becker Use of the saw became an implied term of the agreement; therefore the defect was a breach of the contractual standard of duty. Three points to look for:

  1. The characterisation of the contract;
  2. The analysis of implied terms; and
  3. The resolution of the standard of duty issue by reference to the content of the implied term. Greaves & Co (Contractors) Ltd v Baynham Meikle & Partners [1975]

 Issue: The ‘expert’ and ‘non-expert’ standard  Facts: G (contractors) engaged to construct a factory. B (structural engineers) employed to design structure. Floors had to take weight of heavy forklifts. Finished building was structurally unsound: subject to vibration, cracks and further damage. Was the standard of contractual duty strict or merely required exercise of care?  Held: The design was unfit for purpose. Engineers were in breach of contract. Requisite standard of care is implied in fact (based on the imputed intention of the parties) and implied in law (imposed by the court in contracts of a defined type).

  1. Engineers had a general obligation (law) to exercise reasonable skill and care
  2. Engineers had a specific obligation (fact) to ensure the design was fit for purpose. Chin Keow v Govt of Malaysia [1967] Referenced in Greaves v Baynham Meikle

 Issue: The ‘expert’ and ‘non-expert’ standard  Facts: Doctor was found negligent because he failed to act on information which showed patient was allergic to penicillin.  Held: The professional standard of contractual duty is the standard of “the ordinary skilled person exercising and professing to have that special skill”. Extent of the duty is not an absolute warranty of fitness but that the good/service will be reasonably fit for purpose. Measures taken are assessed against the circumstances. Reg Glass Ltd v Rivers Locking Systems Pty Ltd (1968)

 Issue: The ‘expert’ and ‘non-expert’ standard  Facts: Rivers was employed to install security door in shop, burglary occurred with loss of stock. Considered causation.  Held: Implied term that the door was ‘burglar proof’, relied on the skill and ability to hang and fit a door that offered reasonable protection from theft. Work was not fit for purpose. Reg Glass received damages for faulty door and theft of stock because the loss suffered was due to the breach.

Bolam v Friern Hospital management Committee [1957] Approved in Chin Keow v Govt Malaysia

 Issue: Ordinary standard versus expert standard  Facts: Electro-shock therapy patient suffered injury.  Held: Where performance of contractual duties requires some special skill or competence the test cannot be the ‘man on the Clapham omnibus’ because he does not have that special skill. Standard is that of a reasonably competent [skilled professional] at that time. Doctors were not negligent because their actions met industry standards. There was no breach of professional standard of care. Carew Counsel Pty Ltd v French [2002]  Issue: Ordinary standard versus expert standard  Facts: Whether a solicitor was negligent in failing to take proper steps to protect his indigent client from claims by his creditors.  Held: Solicitor was not negligent, found to have used reasonable skill and care. The standard is not one of perfection, but of a reasonably competent professional.