The doctrine of penalties and the 'absurd paradox': does it really matter in 2003?
Series: International Construction Law Review ; 20(4) October 2003, 505-516(12)Publication details: 2003Subject(s): Summary: Looks at the situation where when a sum is payable on the occurence of an event rather than upon breach of contract. It is irrelevant whether the payer can convince a court that penalties apply or whether equity has a role to prevent an 'absurd paradox'. The written contract is the most important item.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | ABS67119 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 124174-1001 |
Browsing London shelves, Shelving location: Journal article Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
Looks at the situation where when a sum is payable on the occurence of an event rather than upon breach of contract. It is irrelevant whether the payer can convince a court that penalties apply or whether equity has a role to prevent an 'absurd paradox'. The written contract is the most important item.