Sentences with word «repudiatory»

However, his claim was struck out on the basis it had no reasonable prospect of success due to a previous High Court decision on the doctrine of repudiatory breach in a dispute over LLP membership.

Advising and representing a German company in a claim in the Commercial Court in relation to a claim for repudiatory breach of a distribution agreement

The judge found that two of the employees were lawfully dismissed as they had acted in repudiatory breach of both the express terms of their contracts of employment and their implied duties of fidelity as employees.

Nor — one would think — is failing to comply with the notice necessarily repudiatory in either sense discussed above.

It will generally be inequitable to do so if / when (a) his conduct becomes repudiatory in either sense and / or (b) he fails to comply with a notice requiring him to perform.

Further, a Hogg variation will constitute conduct that could equally be treated as repudiatory breach.

Firstly, the innocent party must decide whether the breach has been serious enough to be called repudiatory i.e. whether it is serious enough to justify terminating the contract.

The first sentence suggests doubt as to the correctness of Gunton, suggesting that employers may be able to unilaterally terminate by repudiatory breach without acceptance.

And it is repudiatory if:

There was no mention of any breach (including repudiatory breach) in the notice.

EE therefore tried to claim substantial losses on the common law basis of the loss of bargain resulting from this alleged repudiatory breach.

It also held that, as suspension took place only a few days after additional supportive measures had been put in place (which had not been fully implemented), this also constituted a further repudiatory breach of contract by Lambeth.

The employee gives up a valuable right and the employer who summarily dismisses takes the risk the employee will have committed an antecedent repudiatory breach.

Many PILON clauses include a provision that any later discovered repudiatory breaches disentitle an employee from receiving notice pay.

Chris was instructed on behalf of the 1st Defendant in relation to this claim for repudiatory breach of a long term contract to provide port services.

Sir Terence Etherton in Urban 1 took a different — and, it is thought, better — approach: failing to comply with a notice is not necessarily repudiatory but rather prevents the wrongdoer later claiming equitable relief (eg specific performance, if / when he is in a position to complete).

If it is not, then there can be a period of limbo once the notice expires — the wrongdoer can not force the innocent party to complete but the innocent party can not terminate unless / until the wrongdoer's conduct becomes repudiatory.

The case was heard in an ICC arbitration before Sir Phillip Otton who held that Essar was in repudiatory breach of an operations management agreement and awarded Norscot damages and various other sums under the agreement, totalling over US$ 12 million.

Even wording in EE's termination letter that reserved its rights did not help EE, because EE had not exercised its right to terminate for repudiatory breach in the first place.

It's a concept grounded in contract law, i.e. for a claim to succeed, the employee must show that their employer's conduct was so bad (what's called a repudiatory breach of contract) that it destroyed the employment contract, thus entitling them to resign.

The High Court held that EE's termination notice «unequivocally communicated» that it was exercising its contractual right to terminate upon insolvency, a right which arose independently of the repudiatory breach.

an employer properly following its disciplinary process and / or the outcome of such a process, can not amount to, or contribute to, a repudiatory breach of contract

This case involved Ms Kaur, a nurse, who argued that her employer's instigation, handling and outcome (a final written warning, upheld at internal appeal) of its disciplinary process following her altercation with a colleague, was unreasonable such that it amounted to a repudiatory breach of the implied term of mutual trust and confidence.

EE later alleged that Phones 4U had committed a repudiatory breach of contract, by ceasing to trade upon the appointment of administrators, meaning that Phones 4U was in breach of its contractual obligations to market and sell its products for the duration of the contract.

If not, was it nevertheless a part of a course of conduct comprising several acts and omissions which, viewed cumulatively, amounted to a repudiatory breach of the employee's contract by showing that all trust and confidence had been destroyed?

However, to maintain its loss of bargain claim, EE needed to show that the termination letter was an exercise of its common law right to terminate for repudiatory breach, and not simply a termination for insolvency under its contractual right to do so.

A repudiatory breach can be a one - off act by the employer or a course conduct on the employer's part which can cumulatively amount to a breach of contract entitling an employee to resign following a «last straw» incident, even though this last straw by itself does not amount to a breach of contract.

If not, was that act (or omission) by itself a repudiatory breach of contract (i.e. of sufficient importance to justify resignation)?

Following an arbitration in respect of a repudiatory breach of an operations management agreement, the Respondent in the arbitration was found liable to the Claimant for around US$ 12 million in total (including costs).

When deciding whether the breach was repudiatory, the EAT held the question was not dependent on whether it is fair to change the terms of the contract, but on whether the contract was broken in a sufficiently serious way.

But in any event a repudiatory breach may be accepted as such by conduct rather than mere words.

A breach of the first always entitles the innocent party to terminate; a breach of the second never does; and a breach of the third can do, if it is repudiatory.

If you are the innocent party, serve a notice calling on the other side to perform but do not assume that a failure to comply is necessarily repudiatory.

The innocent party can terminate if (a) the wrongdoer's (lack of) conduct is repudiatory in either sense discussed above or (b) the contract says he can (eg by serving notice making time of the essence).

He can terminate if / when the wrongdoer's behaviour is / becomes repudiatory.

So failing to meet a deadline does not entitle the other party to terminate unless (a) the contract expressly says so (but here, remember, we are talking about contracts that don't) or (b) the breach is «repudiatory» in either sense discussed above.

Bear in mind that a breach can be repudiatory in one / other sense even if no notice is served (see eg Tennaro Ltd v Majorarch Ltd [2003] EWHC 2601 (Ch), [2003] All ER (D) 115 (Nov)-RRB-.

If, having asked those questions, you consider the breach is repudiatory and decide to terminate then be aware of the consequences if you are wrong and make clear the legal basis on which you do so.

Practitioners are familiar with the concept of constructive dismissal: the employer commits a repudiatory breach of the employment contract, in response to which the employee resigns.

10 May 2018 An employee can be unfairly dismissed if they resign as a result of an employer's repudiatory breach, known as «constructive dismissal».

Termination is, in those circumstances, still possible at common law because English law permits a party to terminate a contract in circumstances where the other party has committed a «repudiatory breach».

It is not clear, however, whether an innocent party could avoid complying with the contractual notice provisions if the repudiatory act was itself a «specified» contractual breach.

The courts have described a repudiatory breach as one which «goes to the root of the contract» and which «deprives the innocent party substantially of the whole benefit of the contract» (Hong Kong Fir Shipping Co. Ltd v Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd [1962] 2 QB 26).

Critically, a right to terminate for a repudiatory breach is conditional upon the innocent party not affirming the contract.

An employee can be unfairly dismissed if they resign as a result of an employer's repudiatory breach, known as «constructive dismissal».

It was held that the «last straw» principle simply means that the final matter which leads to the acceptance of a repudiatory breach of contract when taken together and cumulatively with earlier conduct entitles a party to accept a repudiatory breach of contract, whether that last matter is in itself a breach of contract or not.

Where the substance of a complaint is made known it is not also necessary to identify the trigger for accepting the repudiatory breach, and so the trigger for a decision to accept a repudiatory breach of contract need not itself be the subject of a grievance.