Sentences with phrase «for breach of contract regarding»

If he can not produce a legitimate copy of the original email, you should contact an attorney to discuss your options for breach of contract regarding move - out notification.

A consultant surgeon dismissed for gross professional and personal misconduct can not bring a # 3.8 m claim against an NHS trust for breach of contract regarding the disciplinary hearing, the Supreme Court has ruled.

Not exact matches

Under no circumstances will the sites or the Chopra parties be liable to you for any loss or damages of any kind that are directly or indirectly related to the sites, the materials in the sites, the downloadable items, user content, your use or inability to use, or the performance of the sites, any action taken in connection with an investigation by the sites or law enforcement authorities regarding your use of the sites, and action taken in connection with copyright or other intellectual property owners, any errors or omission in the sites, technical operation, or any damage to any users computer, hardware, software, wireless devices, cellular phone, modem or other equipment or technology, including without limitation damage from any security breach or from any virus, bugs, tampering, fraud, scam, error, omission, interruption, defect, delay in operation or transmission, computer line or network failure or any other technical or other malfunction, even if foreseeable or even if the sites or Chopra parties have been advised of or should have known of the possibility of such damages, whether in an action of contract, negligence, strict liability or tort.

Defending technology company and its board of directors in multimillion dollar PA state court action brought by founder / consultant / shareholder alleging claims for breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, and rescission; prosecuting action in NJ federal court on behalf of executive terminated in breach of his employment agreement; defending companies and their majority owners in numerous state court actions throughout NY and NJ alleging breach of contract and fraud; defending company in connection with DOL investigation regarding misclassification of employees; defending health - tech entrepreneur in connection with DOL investigation regarding unemployment insurance fraud; counseling global company and its US subsidiary in connection with various employment law matters; and negotiating numerous separation agreements.

«If works which are reasonably necessary and are done to a reasonable standard are carried out under a Partnering Agreement Camden will be able to meet criticism regarding the level of expense by pointing out that Camden is already contractually bound to the Partner and had to place the works with the Partner at the contract rate provided for in the Partnering Agreement, and therefore the costs were indeed reasonably incurred because, even if the works could reasonably have been expected to have been done significantly cheaper by other competent contractors, Camden would be in breach of contract by giving the works to anyone other than the Partner.»

On February 14, 2018, the Ontario Court of Appeal allowed an appeal in Cana International Distributing Inc. v. Standard Innovation Corporation, 2018 ONCA 145, which involved an alleged breach of a contract for, among other things, the exclusive distribution rights in retail shops, drug stores and sex toy retail outlet stores regarding a sex toy called «We - Vibe».

Amy was junior counsel in Ranson v Customer Systems plc [2012] EWCA Civ 841 (an employment dispute before the Court of Appeal regarding a claim for breach of contract, fiduciary duty and restrictive covenant).

Any dispute between us relating to our representation of you, including, without limitation, claims for breach of contract, professional negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, misrepresentation, fraud and disputes regarding attorney fees and / or costs charged shall be submitted to binding arbitration through the Cincinnati Bar Association, upon the written request of one party after the service of that request on the other party.

Claims are divided into type A and type B; broadly speaking, type A claims (for example, statutory redundancy payments, unlawful deductions from wages and breach of contract) are those which the Lord Chancellor regards as typically the more straightforward and accordingly the fees related to such claims are lower than those for type B claims (which include discrimination, unfair dismissal and whistleblowing claims).

As to the latter, Hasham v Zenab [1960] AC 316, [1960] 2 WLR 374 shows that specific performance might be decreed even where no claim for breach of contract had (yet) arisen and the Court of Appeal in P&O Nedlloyd held that it was therefore wrong in principle to regard specific performance — as Mr Justice Colman had done at first instance — as being no more than an equitable remedy for an existing breach of contract.

That broad common law principle was subject to an anomalous, that was, unprincipled, exception regarding claims for interest losses by way of damages for breach of a contract to pay a debt: in London, Chatham and Dover Railway Co v South Eastern Railway Co [1893] AC 429 it was decided that at common law a court had no power to award interest by way of damages for the late payment of a debt.

Casey v. Masullo Brothers Builders, Inc. (218 A.D. 2d 907)- Buyer sues seller for fraud, misrepresentation, mistake of fact and breach of contract where buyer purchased residence based upon representations by seller through newspaper advertisements and representations by seller's Realtor regarding the school district within which the property was located; Realtor's statement based upon own investigation, loan profile sheet from an abstract company prepared prior to the closing, and town tax rolls which confirmed placement of the property within the disclosed school district; unless the facts are matters peculiarly within one party's knowledge, the other party must make use of means available to him to ascertain, by the exercise of ordinary intelligence, the truth of such representations; question of fact exists whether a reasonable inquiry would have revealed the correct school district; order dismissing seller's motion for summary judgment affirmed.

2d 651)-- remedies provision of the Property Condition Disclosure Act are unenforceable beyond the requirement to give a $ 500 credit at closing should the seller refuse to provide the form, thereafter, common law or statutory remedies, if any, are available; information contained in the disclosure statement survives neither contract nor closing; seller answering «unknown» on the disclosure form triggers a duty to inquire on the part of the buyer and relieves the seller of any potential liability for defects that arise in regard to the part of the premises covered by the question; any information disclosed during the sale of the property merges into the contract and does not exist on its own basis of a common law cause of action; buyer's action based on breach of the disclosure statement is dismissed on the grounds that no such cause of action is created by RPL Article 14; buyer's relief exists under common law contract theories and buyers have not proven their prima faciecase under those theories