Part XXI-A of Cr. P.C provides legal sanction to plea-bargaining thus making it an procedure established by law and thus does not violate the rights of the accused, keeping in mind adherence to the 3 key criteria to fulfil legality of plea-bargaining i.e. Knowledge, Intention, Voluntary. Sec- 265-G of Cr. P.C, judgement delivered by the court under section 265-G shall be final and no appeal (except the special leave petition under Article 136 and writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the constitution) shall lie in any court against such
Forfeiture Forfeiture is the termination of the lease If a tenant breaches a covenant under the tenancy the landlord may have the right to re-enter the property to end the tenancy. This is known as forfeiture. The landlord can only forfeit a tenancy if such a right for breach of particular terms of the tenancy and is expressly stated in the tenancy.
This Parol evidence rule, which has been considered as a common law rule, prevent the parties to the written contract from providing any additional extrinsic evidence, which reveals an ambiguity and refines it, in addition to the terms prescribed in the written contract which appears as complete. The supporting justification to this rule is that since the parties to the contract have signed a final written contract, the extrinsic evidence of the terms and agreements held before should not be taken into consideration while construing the contract, as the contracting parties had already excluded them from the contract. In simple words, one may follow this common law rule to avoid any contradiction with the written contract.
The objection on work product grounds will likely be denied in relation to Nick Carraway’s report. Nick Carraway’s report is not likely work product, but more information is needed. If Carraway’s appraisal was requested or conducted when Jay Gatsby intended to sue Tom Buchanan, then it is work product. This is because the document was obtained with a realistic prospect of litigation. Gatsby may have already been sufficiently irritated after learning from Jordan Baker that Picasso almost never signed his painting, and considered whether the supposed $50,000 discount he received was a sham.
Introduction This question requires an examination of the law of contract and the nature of the subject matter that was contracted between the parties. Only Antonia and Jonathan are legally bound by and entitled to enforce the contract (Coulls v Bagot’s ) and may sue or be sued under the contract. The rights and obligations of Antonia and Jonathan depend on whether the contract has been validly terminated. If the contract validly terminated, all future obligation will be terminated, but obligations arising prior to termination remains intact.
1. Describe how the legal foundation for arbitration as it exists today in the United States was developed. The first mention of labor arbitration in American labor history dates to a clause in the constitution of the journey men Cabinet Makers of Philadelphia in 1829. The earliest arbitration hearing was in 1865 when ironworkers in Pittsburg arbitrated their wages.
‘’ the rug will go to the first person who accepts it’’. A similar case is the Carlill v Carbolic
When evidence is introduced that the accused and the complainant have either been married or have been living together for a period of time, and in situations such as this, it’s the judge’s duty to direct the jury that any inference can have no bearing on the issues to be decided. Section 41 (3) (c), shows what amounts to similarity between the complainant’s behaviour and that alleged to have occurred as part of, or about the same as the occasions in question. According to Lord Clyde in R v A , the similarity need be neither ‘rare’ nor ‘bizarre’. The question in R v A was whether or not the defendant was allowed to cross examine the
Plaintiff once again argues that it was the prevailing party and that an award of attorney fees and expenses to defendants should, therefore, be denied. Plaintiff acknowledges that it bases its argument on the same authorities used to support its Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s Memorandum of Costs. Because the authorities and argument on this point are set forth in Defendants’ Reply to Plaintiff’s Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s Memorandum of Costs, the argument will not be repeated here. Defendants simply add the observation that in the context of Plaintiff’s opposition to an award of attorney fees and costs, Plaintiff uses a verbal sleight-of-hand to further muddy the record. Plaintiff incorrectly
Specific performance is an extraordinary equitable remedy that compels a party to execute a contract accordingly to the precise terms agreed upon or to execute it substantially so that, under the circumstances, justice, will be done between the parties. Specific performance grants the Plaintiff what he actually bargained in the contract rather than damages (pecuniary compensation for loss or injury incurred through the unlawful conduct of another) for not receiving it. This Specific Performance is an equitable rather than legal remedy. By compelling the parties to perform exactly what they had agreed to perform. Specific Performance can be granted only by the court in the exercise of its equity powers, subsequent to a determination of whether a valid contract can be enforced exist and an evaluation of the relief sought.
The general rule is that silence cannot amount to acceptance , and Ben’s failure to reply to the email is consistent with silence. However, an exception to this rule was discussed in Empirnall, where it was held that where the offeree acts exactly in accordance with the conditions of the offer, then this can constitute an acceptance by conduct. This requirement is extinguished in the case of unilateral contracts, which require the offeree to perform his/her obligations under the bargain as acceptance of the offer. A binding agreement is formed upon completion of the performance.
Guardian Life Ins. Co. of America, 162 N.C.App. 477, 482, 593 S.E.2d 595, 599 (2004) (citations and quotations omitted). The Court has described “fiduciary duty,” and the limitations of its application to employment situations, as follows: For a breach of fiduciary duty to exist, there must first be a fiduciary relationship between the parties. Such a relationship has been broadly defined by this Court as one in which there has been a special confidence reposed in one who in equity and good conscience is bound to act in good faith and with due regard to the interests of the one reposing confidence and it extends to any possible case in which a fiduciary relationship exists in fact, and in which there is confidence reposed on one side, and resulting domination and influence on the other.
There are many different ethical topics that philosophers give most of their attention such as abortion, prostitution, cloning, overpopulation, reparations, etc. One ethical topic that many philosophers do not draw a lot of attention to is adultery. Adultery is defined by Merriam-Webster as voluntary sexual intercourse between a married man and someone other than his wife or between a married woman and someone other than her husband. “What’s Wrong with Adultery?” by Don Marquis is an essay written in response to different accounts on the wrongness of adultery and is the essay on which this writing will focus.
Assignment Week 2 Daisy Taylor Business Law May 12, 2016 Professor Goldstein Keller Graduate School of Management Chapter 14 problem 2 Real property: Robert Briggs v. Winfield and Emma Sackett Statute of Frauds and Equitable Exceptions is a rule enforced by many states concerning certain contracts. The states statutes are virtually uniform in that they require contracts involving interest in land, one year plus, considerations in marriage, more than one year contracts and many other contracts to be in writing. Common sense tells us that any contract that is very important should be in writing. This is important because in case of any breaches in a contract, then there is solid evidence to help in dealing with the issue at hand (Tepper,