Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Contract Law > Equitable Remedies > Flashcards

Equitable Remedies Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
MBE flashcards MPRE flashcards Civil Procedure 1L flashcards
1
Q

Co‐operative Insurance Society Ltd v Argyll Stores (Holdings) Ltd [1997] Facts

A
  • A leased a shopping mall
  • In lease, covenant that they would use it as a supermarket and it would remain open for normal hours
  • A wanted to close the mall
  • Was the covenant enforceable?
  • Held:
  • No
  • No way to enforce to keep the shop open
  • Cannot award specific performance
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Co‐operative Insurance Society Ltd v Argyll Stores (Holdings) Ltd [1997] Principle

A

Specific Performance is difficult to use

• No way to enforce to keep the shop open

Contracts not specifically enforceable
2) Contracts requiring constant supervision

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Societe des Industries Metallurgiques SA v The Bronx Engineering Co Ltd [1975] Facts

A
  • machine that D manufactured
  • court refused specific performance
  • machine was unique
  • they will not make the same one
  • Time is not that important
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Societe des Industries Metallurgiques SA v The Bronx Engineering Co Ltd [1975] Principle

A

The availability of a replacement

• unsatisfactory substitute

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Cohen v Roche [1927] Facts

A
  • situation where there was no satisfactory substitute
  • white company chairs
  • buyer wanted specific performance
  • held:
  • they were not special value or interest
  • not unique enough to get specific performance
  • RARE TO AWARD SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Cohen v Roche [1927] Principle

A

The availability of a replacement

  • they were not special value or interest
  • not unique enough to get specific performance

• RARE TO AWARD SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Johnson v Agnew [1979] Principle for specific Performance (4)?

A

1) termination for breach of contract is prospective rather than retrospective
o looks at future obligations rather than past obligations

2) C for specific performance does not forfeit his right to repudiate if D accepts the breach

3) Court will generally oversee specific performance
o Decides when it has taken place

4) damages are assessed at date of breach

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Decro‐Wall International SA v Practitioners in Marketing Ltd [1971] Facts

A
  • D Manufactured tile
  • P was distributor
  • Contract said either side could terminate the contract upon provision of reasonable notice
  • P was trying to develop the market in the UK
  • Spent a lot off money of marketing
  • Expected profits to be low at first, but would eventually grow
  • They were right
  • D terminated the agreement once it reached that stage
  • What is reasonable notice in this situation?
  • Held:
  • Cant just cut it off
  • 12 months
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Decro‐Wall International SA v Practitioners in Marketing Ltd [1971] Principle

A

Difficulty of quantifying damages

• Cant just cut it off

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Evans Marshall & Co Ltd v Bertola SA [1973] Principle

A

Difficulty of quantifying damages

  • considered of damages were adequate remedy
  • Held:
  • LJ Sacks?
  • Where there is difficulty, specific performance and injunctions are preferable
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Warner Bros v Nelson [1937] Facts

A

• Betty Davis (Nelson) N
• Contract that she would act for W, but would not act or sing for anyone else without permission from W
• Also, She could do no other employment during this time
• Held:
o Did not enforce covenant that she could not work anywhere else
o Cannot be compelled to act for W as well
o Did allow covenant that she could not act or sing for anyone else
o Cannot force someone to act against their will

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Warner Bros v Nelson [1937]

A

Specific Performance

o Cannot be compelled to act for W as well

o Cannot force someone to act against their will

Contracts not specifically enforceable
1) • Contracts for personal services

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Page One Records v Britton [1968] Facts

A

• C was a record company, owned by Larry Page, who was the manager of the pop group ‘The Troggs’
• The Troggs contracted to have C to be their manager and sole agent for 5 years in return for 20% of their profits
• Term of the contract was the The Troggs would not appoint anyone else during this period
• Relationship with Larry Page and The Troggs broke down and the Troggs worte a letter seeking to terminate the contract
• C sought an injunction to prevent the Troggs from appointing a new manager
• Held:
o Injunction refused
o An injunction would be similar to a specific performance by compelling the Troggs to continue to employ C or not work at all

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Page One Records v Britton [1968] Principle

A

Injunction

Refused
o An injunction would be similar to a specific performance by compelling the Troggs to continue to employ C or not work at all

Indirect effect

Mutuality of remedy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Co‐operative Insurance Society Ltd v Argyll Stores (Holdings) Ltd [1998]
o Rules is using specific performance (4)?

A

1) it is not allowed if it causes severe hardship to D
• Tito v Waddell

2) if P acted dishonestly
• only awarded if equity is justified
• if you are dishonest, you cannot be awarded an equitable remedy

3) P fails to perform an inducing promise to D
• will not award it
• Misrep issue

4) if impossible for other party to comply with it
• watts v spence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Beswick v Beswick [1968] Facts

A
  • nephew promised uncle that he would pay annuity to aunt if uncle transferred good will of business to nephew
  • aunt was not party to the contract
  • could she enforce the contract?
  • Damages would just be nominal, no financial
  • Held:
  • Allowed for specific performance
  • Allowed her to enforce the contract
  • It would have be unjust to allow nephew to get benefit of the promise without carrying out his side
17
Q

Beswick v Beswick [1968] Principle

A

When Damages are insignificant

  • Allowed for specific performance
  • It would have be unjust to allow nephew to get benefit of the promise without carrying out his side
18
Q

Tito v Waddell (No 2) [1977] Facts

A

o Ocean island mining case
o Supposed to replant all the trees (specific performance)
o Did not do it because it would cause undue hardship
o Did not make economic sense

19
Q

Tito v Waddell (No 2) [1977] Principle

A

o Rules is using specific performance
1) it is not allowed if it causes severe hardship to D

Contracts not specifically enforceable
3) Contracts which are too vague

20
Q

Watts v Spence Facts

A

o Specific performance was asked to sell land
o Land was not owned by D
o Could not sell it

21
Q

Watts v Spence Principle

A

o Rules is using specific performance

• 4) if impossible for other party to comply with it

22
Q

Gryf‐Lowczowski v Hinchingbrooke Healthcare NHS Trust [2005] Facts

A 
•	G employed as a consultant surgeon
•	Rule:
o	Court applied injunctive relief 
o	If he was not allowed to return to his position, it would be very difficult for him to work in the UK
o	Damages would not be adequate 
o	Career would have ended
23
Q

Gryf‐Lowczowski v Hinchingbrooke Healthcare NHS Trust [2005] Principle

A

Allowed for specific Performance in a Contracts for personal services

Contrasts Warner Bros v Nelson

24
Q

Contracts that are not specifically enforceable (4)

A

1) Contracts for personal services
2) Contracts requiring constant supervision
3) Contracts which are too vague
4) Building contract

25
Q

Mutuality of remedy?

A

o Requirement for specific performance
o Remedy must be mutual
o Cannot request it if it would not be available to you
o If you request it, it must be available to the other side as well

26
Q

Price v Strange [1977] Facts

A

• S had a lease on maisonette
• Made a deal with P that he would sub lease it to him if P did interior and exterior work
• P did some of the work, but did not do exterior work
• S repudiated the agreement
• Prevented P from doing the rest of the work
• Work was completed at S’s own expense
• P sued
• S argued lack of mutuality
• Held:
• Must look at facts to see if mutuality exists
• Fairness plays a role (works both way)
o Equitable remedy
• Just because some obligations might remain, does not prevent specific performance
• Cannot do it in this case because damage were an adequate remedy
• Cannot request specific performance if it cannot be enforced against you

27
Q

Price v Strange [1977] Principle

A

Specific Performance
Mutuality of remedy

• Fairness plays a role (works both way)
o Equitable remedy

• Cannot request specific performance if it cannot be enforced against you

28
Q

3 types of Injunctions?

A
  • 1) • Interlocutory injunctions are designed to regulate the position of the parties pending a hearing
  • 2) • A prohibitory injunction orders a defendant not to do something in breach of contract
  • 3) • A mandatory injunction requires a defendant to reverse the effects of an existing breach
29
Q

Insurance Co v Lloyd’s Syndicate [1995] Facts

A

• D was reassurance
• Commenced arbitration against P
• P had attempted to not be bound by the contract because of non disclosure
• Argued
• Non disclosure
• & P was nt covered under the contract
• P applied for an injunction
• Try to keep D from disclosing the award that had been made
• Did not want to set a precedent
• Held:
• Gave us a Test for when an injunction should be applied
• The reasonable necessity test
o Whether it is reasonably necessary or not to award one

30
Q

Insurance Co v Lloyd’s Syndicate [1995] Principle

A

Injunctions

Gave us a Test for when an injunction should be applied

•The reasonable necessity test
o Whether it is reasonably necessary or not to award one

31
Q

Lumley v Wagner (1852) Facts

A
  • W was contracted to sing in theatre for 3 months
  • Required to sing only for L
  • 3rd party G, offered W a larger sum to sing for him
  • court said they could not compel W to sing
  • Could enforce negative injunction, to prevent her from signing elsewhere
  • Can use negative injunctions from preventing things from occurring
  • Not positive ones
32
Q

Lumley v Wagner (1852) Principle

A

Injunctions

  • Could enforce negative injunction, to prevent her from signing elsewhere
  • Can use negative injunctions from preventing things from occurring
  • Not positive ones
33
Q

Wroth v Tyler [1974] facts

A
  • sale of a house
  • seller backed out because he and wife was splitting up
  • wife put property claim on the house
  • Purchaser sued
  • During litigation, value of house doubled
  • Could we have specific performance?
  • No, because of divorce
  • How much damages should be awarded?
  • Foreseeability
  • How foreseeable was it that house would go up in price
  • Allowed increase in cost of house (it was foreseeable)
  • Assessed on the day wife put property claim
34
Q

Wroth v Tyler [1974] Principle

A

Looked at both damages and equitable remedies

  • Could we have specific performance?
  • No, because of divorce
  • How much damages should be awarded?
  • Foreseeability
  • How foreseeable was it that house would go up in price
  • Allowed increase in cost of house (it was foreseeable)
  • Assessed on the day wife put property claim
35
Q

Equitable Remedies Structure?

A 
o	Always start with standard of performance? 
o	Is there a breach?
•	Type?
•	Remedies
o	Damages
o	Termination
o	Equitable remedies

Contract Law (12 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions