请输入您要查询的百科知识:

 

词条 Jack v Guy
释义

  1. Background

  2. Held

  3. References

{{Multiple issues|{{Orphan|date=January 2017}}{{refimprove|date=January 2017}}
}}{{Infobox court case
| name = Jack v Guy
| court = Court of Appeal of New Zealand
| date_filed =
|image =Coat of arms of New Zealand.svg
|imagesize = 200px
| date decided = 01 December 2004
| full name = NORMAN WILLIAM JACK AND JUDITH ANN JACK Appellant AND MURRAY CLIVE GUY Respondent
| citations =
| judges = Hammond J, Chambers J, Young J
| prior actions =
| subsequent actions =
| opinions =
| transcripts = [https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/pdf/jdo/d7/alfresco/service/api/node/content/workspace/SpacesStore/4c7a0dd0-606d-4565-a504-e3b0b13b971e/4c7a0dd0-606d-4565-a504-e3b0b13b971e.pdf Court of Appeal Judgment]

[https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/pdf/jdo/89/alfresco/service/api/node/content/workspace/SpacesStore/ca8e3cef-a3ee-4d92-b3fd-1fba830b0540/ca8e3cef-a3ee-4d92-b3fd-1fba830b0540.pdf Supreme Court judgment]


| Keywords =
}}Jack v Guy is cited New Zealand case regarding anticipatory breach of contract.[1]

Background

The Jacks owned a forestry block near Fielding and in August 1993 they entered into a contract with Guy to harvest the trees on their property. The contract had a tentative harvest date of February / March 1994, but had the caveat that this was subject to when the harvesting crew was in the area.

The contract also required the Jacks to first obtain the necessary resource consents to harvest the trees and for the roading needed to truck out the timber.

However, the timber market started falling, resulting in Guy's client Raynier bring forward their harvests to October 1993. Guy informed his client the Jack's that the trees had to be harvested by 14 October 1993. This development caught the Jack's unaware, as at this early stage, the Jacks had not applied for the consents.

Guy advised the Jacks that they were in breach of the contract, and he was now cancelling the contract under section 7(3)(c) of the Contractual Remedies Act.

The Jacks replied that they had not breached the contract, and sued Guy for breach of contract.

Held

Guy was entitled to cancel the contract.

References

1. ^{{cite book |title=An introduction to the Law of Contract in New Zealand |edition=4th |last1=Chetwin |first1=Maree |last2=Graw |first2=Stephen |last3=Tiong |first3=Raymond |publisher=Thomson Brookers |ISBN=0-86472-555-8 |year=2006 |page={{page needed|date=January 2014}}}}

4 : New Zealand contract case law|2004 in New Zealand law|2004 in case law|Court of Appeal of New Zealand cases

随便看

 

开放百科全书收录14589846条英语、德语、日语等多语种百科知识,基本涵盖了大多数领域的百科知识,是一部内容自由、开放的电子版国际百科全书。

 

Copyright © 2023 OENC.NET All Rights Reserved
京ICP备2021023879号 更新时间:2024/11/10 18:02:10