ipl-logo

Good Faith Theory

1156 Words5 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Common law and civil law comparison

The principle of “good faith” in contract law has been inserted with the intention of encouraging parties to a contract to deal with each other in a just and sincere manner. The implied concept of “good faith” turns up not only in the countries having civil law systems but also in the countries with common law systems. The key difference between the application of “good faith” in common law countries and civil law countries is that under the common law, the principle of good faith is applied only at the time of performance and enforcement of contracts, whereas in several civil law systems the principle of “good faith” is applied with respect not only to performance of obligations, but also to pre-contractual bargaining, the formation and interpretation …show more content…

National Bank of Canada applied the doctrine of abuse of contractual rights and decided on various factors that may lead to the abuse of contractual rights and obligations. The court was of the opinion that an abuse of contractual rights may occur when the contractual rights are not exercised in a reasonable manner i.e. in accordance with the rules of equity and good faith. Even though the bank in this case acted well within its rights under the contract, the question raised by the court was whether it executed its rights in just and equitable manner. In other words, the appellant did not commit anything wrong by recalling the loan and liquidating company’s assets but, the issue was whether the appellant acted in good faith while doing so? The company and the bank had been doing business for past 50 years and still the bank did not give any notice of such action to the company. Although the bank was not obliged to give notice but it abused its contractual rights by acting in bad faith and not giving reasonable time to the company to fulfill its obligations under the …show more content…

There have been several similar cases where the Bundesgerichtshof (The Federal court of Justice of Germany) has accepted principle of equity and good faith as an overriding principle. It has been held that noncompliance with a formality cannot be pleaded by a party who has enjoyed the benefits of a transaction but claiming invalidity of the contract to avoid his part of the bargain. The doctrine of culpa in contrahendo (fault in the conclusion of contract) has also been applied by the federal court in various cases which operates to cure the formally invalid contract, thus giving the innocent party greater protection than his reliance

Show More
Related
739 Words | 3 Pages

This protected the bank because it ensured that by the time the mortgage is up, they would have their loan and interest fully paid

Read More
245 Words | 1 Pages

Thank you for providing a great example of an institution’s response to the breach of a coach’s contract. After researching the case of Kent State v. Ford, it was apparent that the terms of Ford’s agreement were not interpreted by the coach in the same manner in which the terms were written by the institution. Ford is quoted as stating that the liquidated damages clause was not enforceable (Farkas, 2015). Whereas liquated damages are defined as such: The purpose of a liquidated damages clause is to ensure that the failure of one party to follow the contract does not unfairly hurt the other and the amount agreed to must be a reasonable estimate of any potential damage a breach of contract might cause (faircontracts.org, n.d.).

Read More
1297 Words | 6 Pages

REMEDIES 4.1. It must be made clear that equity treats an unconscionable transaction as voidable, not void, therefore the innocent parties will need to seek remedies and the court will decide on what they see as just and fair. 4.2. Relief against unconscionable conduct will be granted to prevent the stronger party from attempting to enforce or retain the benefits from the transaction when it is against equity and good conscience. The most common remedy is rescission of the contract.

Read More
508 Words | 3 Pages

The trial court held for Zapatha. Dairy mart appealed. In Zapatha v Dairy Mart, 381 Mass. 284; N.E. 2d. 1370 there are two issues at hand. 1) Does the unconscionability of an agreement depend on whether at the time of execution the contract provision at issue could result in unfair surprise and was oppressive to the allegedly disadvantaged party; and 2) Whether a merchant seeking to terminate a business agreement must act in good faith by practicing honesty in fact and observing reasonable commercial standards of fair dealing in that trade.

Read More
1212 Words | 5 Pages

The court back up their reasoning by explaining that in a written contract it “is presumed to be "the final memorial of the parties' agreement” and that the clause in the contract must be followed to complete Jennings’ side of the contract. The court agreed with

Read More
700 Words | 3 Pages

Indeed, had Respondents’ conduct comported with their representations, Appellants would have a straightforward claim against DPR to foreclose on their collateral under the Commercial Code. However, Respondents’ conduct has forced Appellants to seek redress against RQ Inc., RQ LLC, and DPR in tort and under the theory of successor

Read More
1138 Words | 5 Pages

Kern has in the ruling of the case. It is known to the court that J. Kern holds a small number of shares of the Fabulous Inn property. This gives him financial disadvantage if he would rule in favor of Bebe as it would disadvantage the Fabulous Inn, where the incident happened. The court has the obligation to be impartial, if there is reasonable ground to doubt a person’s impartiality, the decisional authority cannot participate in the process.

Read More
3946 Words | 16 Pages

However, it must be determined whether Das’s promise to come until Monday constitutes sufficient consideration. Since, no deposit was made that is there was not sufficient consideration. Das would have to prove that he gave some sort of consideration to Ali to keep the offer open and if Das has taken a bank loan, the court may consider it as a valid consideration. Otherwise, the agreement does not stand according to the law. Therefore, Das cannot have any legal action against

Read More
1074 Words | 5 Pages

As a doctor at St. Als I received five patients in one day. All patients were in a car accident and all patients that came to the hospital under my care were vital members of our community. All needing organs replaced. While at the same time I had another patient come into the hospital who was a homeless man, who had no identification, no family. In that moment there was a thought, what if that patient could save the lives of the five I needed to save?

Read More
1195 Words | 5 Pages

“Estoppel is a mechanism for enforcing consistency; when I have said or done something that leads you to believe in a particular state of affairs, I may be obliged to stand by what I have said or done, even though I am not contractually bound to do so.” – E Cooke An estoppel is simply a method developed by the courts, which could prevent or estop a party from performing in a particular way when the other has relied upon the facts that were represented to him. There are several types of estoppel like proprietary estoppel, estoppel by representation of fact. However, in this essay our focus is on the promissory estoppel as it relates to the Law of Contract.

Read More
805 Words | 4 Pages

These days with social media, and other rising technological advances, one might find it impossible to resist the urge to want to protest and debate with all the issues going on in the world today. It sounds easy enough to post your side of an argument on anything someone shares but going about it affectively to really get the opposing side to agree with you is something else entirely. By using the Social Judgment Theory, and understanding one’s ego involvement with an issue, people might just be able to figure out the “Art of Persuasion”. Social Judgement Theory is a “Self-persuasion theory proposed by Carolyn Sherif, Muzafer Sherif, and Carl Hovland” (Daniel O’ Keefe, 2016). It is defined as “The perception and evaluation of an idea by comparing

Read More
1268 Words | 6 Pages

[5] Common law works in a different way, the judges rather than the Parliament make common law or ‘judge-made law’. Considering criminal and civil cases, the judges take decisions based on the stare decisis principle (Latin “to stand by things decided”, the legal principle of determining points in litigation according to precedent [4]), deliver rulings and create precedents, thus applying the law to real life situations. Therefore, the value of the precedent is very high in the English Common Law system. The strengths of common law

Read More
348 Words | 2 Pages

Decisions about right and wrong, good and bad imbue our day to day liveliness; Behaving accordingly as individuals, shaping liable governments and trussed organization, and making our society as a whole more ethical. I understand that decision about “right” and “wrong” and “good” and “bad” can be difficult, and is somethings related to individual ambience. Even though ethics conflate or confused with ways in which people may make choices including law and religion, Ethics provides standards for acceptable and unacceptable behaviors that guides one decision on how we ought to act in a range of situations. I believe I use the “The Common Good Approach” mostly.

Read More
1163 Words | 5 Pages

1. Explain why it might be difficult to effectively study law following the positive transition. What are the advantages and disadvantages of a humanistic approach to the study of law? Studying law is relatively difficult as the degree holds much of the responsibilities to sort out the issue concerned with the society (ANU, 2014).

Read More
870 Words | 4 Pages

The defendant wrote to their customers saying ‘Henty & Sons hereby give notice that they will not receive in payment cheques drawn on any of the branches of the Capital and Counties Bank.’ The contents of the circular became known and there was a run on the bank. The bank claimed they had been defamed. Held: The plaintiff’s appeal failed. In their natural meaning the words were not capable in law of being defamatory.

Read More

More about Good Faith Theory

Related Topics

Open Document