New answers tagged

1

There is not enough information for a conclusive assessment. Your description of the lease agreement is not sufficient for discerning whether references to the "second year" are meant (1) to discourage the tenant from moving out at the end of the first year, or (2) as a discount (only for the first year) to induce the tenant to enter a multi-year ...


0

This would probably get down to the specific terms agreed with the escrow account, but from a layman perspective of the terms, person A loses the money. Changing your mind is not a different category. In fact, as soon as A lighted the first cigarette (and/or was caught, maybe), surely he would change his mind and want to get out of the bet. The proper ...


2

This is how a court would resolve the ambiguity You agreed that the rent would change at the end of the first year. One of the figures is clearly wrong. Is it the one that raises the rent or the one that lowers the rent. Which one makes more sense? Well, 99.999% (approx) of leases have rents increasing over time so this is probably one of those. The rent is $...


0

Can someone back out from a bet like this? The issue of whether a contract exists at all depends on the jurisdiction (see phoog's comment). The example @Sneftel provided is inapplicable because that one actually entails a consideration provided by the counterparty: "tools to assist you in achieving your goal". Only in some scenarios the matter ...


3

common-law What would a court say to Person A if - after 3 months he decided he was no longer interested to stop smoking and wanted his money back? For simplicity, let's take the contract between the escrow service and A/B out of the equation. There is no contract between A and B because there is no consideration moving from B. B parts with nothing for ...


3

Good Luck By signing up to use the website, you obviously agreed to a contract with the company behind the website, and I'm sure the company's lawyers had you agree that you would have no legal recourse against them, unless it is binding arbitration with the arbiter of their choice, which would hardly be advantageous to you. I'm sure they absolved themselves ...


5

There are only two arguments you can make: The match making website did something wrong. I don't see how you can make this argument unless you have some reason to suspect they actually did something wrong. Strict liability applies. I think this fails for two reasons. One is that no theory of strict liability that I know of would apply to this situation. ...


-1

It is a tacit acknowledgement that one's faculty with the English language is so poor that one has not been able to avoid doubt in the foregoing. This is not an edifying disposition for a lawyer - a professionally trained expert wordwright, after all. https://jollycontrarian.com/index.php?title=For_the_avoidance_of_doubt


3

You are probably an employee Answer these questions: Can you say “no” when the University offers you work? Or vice-versa, can they say “no” when you want to work? Can you subcontract the work? That is, can you hire someone to do what the University hired you to do? Do you control how and when you work? For example, when you break University rules are you ...


3

That Apple advertised the Mac Pro as "expandable" does not mean that they promised that any particular new chip or technology could be applied to the Mac Pro. As a comment said "built for the future" will generally be treated as puffery that does not extend a specific guarantee unless there are more specific claims along with it. ...


1

In general, when the same parties have two or more different contracts, and the term of one conflict with the terms of another, the most recent will control unless there are specific provisions to the country. However, if there is a reasonable way to interpret the two contrasts so that they do not c conflict, a court is likely to take that interpretation if ...


4

Do newer contracts superceed prior ones? It depends on whether the contracts conflict with each other. That is why many contracts contain language akin to "This contract supersedes and replaces any previous or contemporaneous agreements between the parties". The parties would need to adapt such clause if the contracts are compatible and they ...


-1

How is this interpreted? I am understanding this as no action needs to be taken? The statement you copy/pasted seems to be incomplete. You might want to verify. However, the phrase "within five days" is indicative of a deadline, which suggests that at least one of the parties to the contract is required to perform some action regarding the copies.


0

If you look under Help/Policies/Program Policies/Countries accepted for seller registration, both Russia and Azerbaijan are included, so you can reside there and sell in the US. Iran and North Korea are excluded (presumably due to sanctions). If I had to guess, both the form asking about citizenship and the helpdesk answer Dave D. found are due to employee ...


-3

Well realistically, it is your choice to sign up for Amazon. They're not making you give them your country of birth. They're telling you "If you want to use our services, you have to give us your country of birth," rather than "We're forcing you to give us your country of birth either way." It's like Apple taking 40% of developer income ...


2

I think that you are referring to the prevention doctrine also known as the performance doctrine of the common law of contracts. Prevention doctrine is a common-law principle of contract law which says that a contracting party has an implied duty not to do anything that prevents the other party from performing its obligation. A party who prevents ...


1

"Frustation of purpose" caused by a party to the contract is still a frustration of purpose. I don't know of a name for that specific type of act, but it falls into the broader category of a breach of the duty of good faith. Every party to a contract has a duty to act in good faith to fulfill the purposes of the contract. So imagine that a bride ...


1

Is there a name for this analogy to "frustration of purpose" when it was due to the actions of one party rather than "act of God"? Breach of contract. The party who tore down the building knew beforehand his commitment pursuant to the contract. Frustration of purpose is from the standpoint of the party without fault. See Restatement (...


0

The judiciary is, as a body, separate to that of companies or corporations. This is by history and by design. What there are are arbitration, and generally to maintain their independence, they are not linked to any company or corporation. This is merely mediation in the hope that the case doesn't proceed to an expensive lawsuit for all concerned. What ...


1

united-states TL;DR: You are likely to have a case in California, Colorado, New Mexico, New York, and Oregon. Read this report for details and, if you've got the balls, file a lawsuit. First of all, let's make the scope clear: this matter concerns just bare contractual relationship as opposed to employment. Amazon sellers are no employees of Amazon. They are ...


5

We hire very good paralegals, explain to them what we are trying to achieve, and let them use common sense and the good organizational skills that got them hired to figure it out. (Really, I once had a part-time assistant in my law office who had a full time job doing essentially what you describe over and over again. This is a classic transactional ...


3

A clause states "If the contract is breached you accept that you must pay for damages. We shall determine the amount." Will this hold up in court? A court is going to want to look for context and an interpretation that would make this provision make sense before invalidating it (which it might). For example, if there was a schedule of the amount ...


2

It is normal if there is a clause like "Both parties agree that the [governement's judical] court in XYZ has jurisdiction in case of controversy." That is enforcible. Another typical clause that can be enforceable in countries that allow binding arbitration is akin to "Both parties agree to undergo arbitration." That means they seek an ...


0

It's very unlikely this would hold up. A contract can be voided as unconscionable if it is so one-sided that it is unfair to one party. Awarding unlimited compensation at the whim of the party receiving them with no regard to the actual damage suffered would almost certainly qualify.


1

The liability of an escrow agent is normally limited contractually to the bare minimum allowed by law, this generally limits the liability of the escrow agent to compliance with court orders and to refraining from willful or reckless conduct made in bad faith. Also, usually a seller's attorney is not allowed to serve as a true third-party escrow agent, ...


2

No tort has been committed This is a straight up breach of contract. I also don’t understand how this happened - settlement on land usually involves the mortgage holder to taking payment in full and discharging the mortgage.


2

Why would you put that in a contract? The normal remedy for contract breaches is damages so the first sentence is redundant. And a court will determine the amount, so the second sentence is wrong.


4

In most jurisdictions, companies cannot create courts. The right to do that is reserved for the state. People and companies can agree (by contract) to use arbitration for issues arising from the contract. This may be a contract clause which both sides entered consciously, or part of the terms of service which the user/customer clicked without really reading ...


5

If you substitute the courts with line managers and HR policies, this is just a description of an internal discipline and grievance process.


5

Much, if not all, of what you describe already exists in many companies. This mostly takes place in the company's HR department, more serious matters are escalated to a board of directors, and nothing prevents the company from suing the employee in an actual court. The sued, penalized, or terminated employee may establish that the company departed from its ...


1

The freelancer is a data processor under GDPR Data processors have similar but different obligations under GDPR as data controllers. Having a privacy policy is the least of them.


2

Adults are bound to contracts with minors The technical term is that a contract with a minor is that it is voidable by the minor unless it is subject to the exemptions - a contract for necessities or a contract of benefit to the minor (e.g. a reasonable mobile phone contract). Until the minor chooses to void it, it is binding on everyone involved. They can ...


2

If you're asking how to get a legal agreement to be completely immune to dismissal, don't. No sane person will consider it and most will wonder why you need to be unfireable and rescind the offer. Workers rights in Germany protect against unfair dismissal. Odds are if you do lose your job it'll either be through a mistake of yours or the company suffering ...


2

A seller on Amazon is neither an employee or a contractor. From Amazon's FAQ for Selling on Amazon: What is selling on Amazon? Selling on Amazon is a program that lets individuals and businesses sell their products and inventory on in [sic] Amazon's stores, like Amazon.com. The form you are completing is to apply to sell products on Amazon's stores. I can'...


2

The EEOC states that national original discrimination in employment is illegal, which is supported by 28 CFR Part 44 (discriminate means "the act of intentionally treating an individual differently from other individuals because of national origin or citizenship status, regardless of the explanation for the differential treatment, and regardless of ...


2

No. If the person who reviews the contract is in fact a lawyer, and does the review in his or her capacity as a lawyer so that there is in fact an attorney-client relationship, the lawyer would be subject to malpractice liability if the review failed to meet the required standard of care. This generally means that the lawyer made errors that no reasonably ...


5

The German law mandates minimum notice periods for work contracts. But there is no restriction on maximum notice periods, as long as the employee does not have a longer notice period than the employer (§622 BGB de|en). So yes, in theory you could negotiate that the company is not allowed to fire you in the first 4 years. But I would find it unlikely that ...


1

is this enforceable? Yes. There is nothing wrong with that clause. The contract even contains the redundant terms of 5(c). It is unclear why you think the clause might be unenforceable. I'm assuming you already read the Employment Standards Act that is mentioned in the clause. can the same contract require the employee to give at least 2 weeks notice or is ...


11

Is it legal to have an "anti exclusive" contract? Yes. In general this legally equivalent to, and more efficient than, drafting a version for each imaginable type of entity with whom the offeror would be willing to enter a contract. RyanM's answer points out the exception where such clauses would be unlawful. But in the software scenario you ...


33

united-states Totally legal, as long as whatever you're forbidding isn't a protected class (race, gender, etc.—the details vary by jurisdiction), or, to some degree, a pretense for one. A real-life example comes via a feud between two artists: Stuart Semple and Anish Kapoor. For reasons that are not particularly relevant to this explanation (other than ...


0

Could we then amend the wording so it's governed by Singapore law? Your reference to "a pre-existing [...] wording" makes it unclear whether you mean (1) adopting and/or adapting clauses of some unrelated contract(s) in order to create a new one, or (2) modifying a contract which currently binds the parties. Both approaches are lawful as long as ...


0

Could we then amend the wording so it's governed by Singapore law? Yes, in fact you could amend the wording of any document to make it compliant with a relevant law because you have amended it to be so.


1

Speak to a lawyer. Many legal firms do free consultations. This way you can find out if there is a chance of success and what your next steps are.


0

Do I have a basis for suing based on false claims that were made before I joined, damage done to my career, emotional distress/damages or anything similar? Except for the sign-on bonus if the company intends to recover it, from your description it seems very unlikely that you have a cause of action that would be worth pursuing. The relevant clauses of your ...


1

One cannot (i.e., does not) contract with oneself. The language in bold is meaningless in that it --evidently by mistake-- merges counterparties into the one that is labeled "Company". Equivalently, the language at issue is inconsequential to the extent the NDA altogether outlines rights and duties for [counter-]parties whose set of interests ...


1

Depending on the exact terms of the contract, the employer may have the legal right to make deductions from your wages. Any such deductions must be "fair and reasonable" and accurately reflect the value your employer has gained from you undertaking the training. For example, in most cases, leaving within the first year of commencing the training ...


3

There is no grammatical reason for the capitalisation of the 'P' in this situation. It is used merely to merely emphasis the following condition(s) or, as you suggest, typos.


3

if you were made aware in advance and had the option of not taking the course, yes This is a collateral contract - a contract related to but functionally independent of your employment contract.


2

The circumstances described would constitute a breach of fiduciary duty, but probably not professional negligence (which is the usual cause of action called "professional malpractice." There is no allegation that the lawyer acted incompetently, just disloyaly. A true breach of fiduciary duty (other than a breach of fiduciary duty of care which is ...


Top 50 recent answers are included