Sign in / up

back to article Behaviour trumps 'non-waiver' clauses, says Court of Appeal

The Post Office was not allowed to walk away from a contract because it had continued to perform its duties for 11 months after the other company breached the contract, the Court of Appeal has ruled. That continuation of the contract after the breach undermined the Post Office's ability to walk away from the deal, even though …

COMMENTS

House rules Send corrections
This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Banfa

    Oops

    "Tele2 did not provide 2004's guarantee by 24th December 2003. That gave the Post Office the right to terminate the agreement. It did not give Tele2 notice that it was terminating, though, until December 2004."

    Presumably you mean December 2005 second time around.

    0 0
  2. Andy W
    Unhappy

    RE: Oops

    Why?

    They terminated in 2004 after failing to receive it's guarantee in December 2003. It says so in the bit you quoated.

    0 0
  3. Simon B
    Flame

    Court of Appeal = rewriter of all contracts "'cus it can"!

    When is a contract NOT a contract, when the Court of Appeal's decides to ignore what the contract states!!!

    0 0
  4. Banfa
    Coat

    RE: RE: Oops

    DOH!!!!

    How very true but that's not how it appeared in my brain when I read it, it appeared as "24th December 2004" :-)

    0 0
  5. Dave

    @Simon B

    No, what this says is:

    write what you want into a contract, but if it contradicts common law, don't expect it to hold up to a lawsuit.

    This is much the same as the way that most EULA's are not as legal as the purveyor would have you believe.

    0 0
This topic is closed for new posts.