Simple question of getting paid
Language: English Series: Contract Journal ; 365(5892) 1 October 1992, 11(1)Publication details: 1992Subject(s): Summary: Discusses the case "King v The Design Company" (1992 unreported) which examined whether the plaintiff was entitled to be paid anything for work which he had admittedly done and for which he had not been paid and of which the defendant had the benefit.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | ABS47174 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 60974-1001 |
Discusses the case "King v The Design Company" (1992 unreported) which examined whether the plaintiff was entitled to be paid anything for work which he had admittedly done and for which he had not been paid and of which the defendant had the benefit.