Scribd Logo
Загрузить

Добро пожаловать в Scribd!

  • Tan Ah Kian V Haji Hasnan

    Загружено:

    PohleeTan
    1K просмотров2 страницы
    The appellant subcontracted with the respondent to complete road construction work by May 30, 1960. However, when inspected on May 27, the work was found to be improperly done, so the appellant contracted another person to finish it. The respondent requested an extension to complete the work, which was denied, so the respondent sued for payment for work already done and materials supplied. The court of appeal ruled that given the nature of the contract, time was not of the essence, so the appellant breached the contract by not granting the extension.

    Исходное описание:

    case

    Оригинальное название

    Tan Ah Kian v Haji Hasnan

    Авторское право

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Доступные форматы

    DOCX, PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd

    Этот документ был вам полезен?

    Это неприемлемый материал?

    Пожаловаться на этот документ
    The appellant subcontracted with the respondent to complete road construction work by May 30, 1960. However, when inspected on May 27, the work was found to be improperly done, so the appellant contracted another person to finish it. The respondent requested an extension to complete the work, which was denied, so the respondent sued for payment for work already done and materials supplied. The court of appeal ruled that given the nature of the contract, time was not of the essence, so the appellant breached the contract by not granting the extension.

    Авторское право:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Скачайте в формате DOCX, PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd
    Отметить как неприемлемый контент
    1K просмотров2 страницы

    Tan Ah Kian V Haji Hasnan

    Загружено:

    PohleeTan
    The appellant subcontracted with the respondent to complete road construction work by May 30, 1960. However, when inspected on May 27, the work was found to be improperly done, so the appellant contracted another person to finish it. The respondent requested an extension to complete the work, which was denied, so the respondent sued for payment for work already done and materials supplied. The court of appeal ruled that given the nature of the contract, time was not of the essence, so the appellant breached the contract by not granting the extension.

    Авторское право:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Скачайте в формате DOCX, PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd
    Отметить как неприемлемый контент
    из 2

    Tan ah Kian v haji hasnan

    The appellant having obtained a contract to construct roads subcontracted with


    the respondent for its performance. The respondent agreed to complete the
    whole work on or before 30 May 1960. On 6 May 1960 the respondent
    commenced work and on 27 May 1960 the appellant inspected the work and
    found ti had not been properly contract with another person for the completion
    of the work. The respondent, on 4 June 1960 requested an extension of time to
    complete the work oand on it not being granted brought an action for work done
    and materials supplied. Judgement having been entered for the respondent as
    claimed, the appellant appealed.
    The court of appeal held that the nature of the contract or of its subject matter
    was such that it cou;d not be implied that this time was of the essence. The
    appellant wa thus in breach of his contract.

    Вам также может понравиться