| 000 | 01185cab a2200265 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | ABS46329 | ||
| 008 | 090401t1992 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d | ||
| 035 | _a(Sirsi) u57835 | ||
| 041 | _aeng | ||
| 100 | _aNicholls, T. | ||
| 245 | _aInterpreting the assignment of contracts | ||
| 260 | _c1992 | ||
| 350 | _a0 | ||
| 490 |
_aChartered Surveyor Weekly _v39(8) 21 May 1992, 55(1) |
||
| 520 | _aHighlights the subtleties, and warns of the consequences, of interpreting ambiguous and inconsistant contract forms. Refers to two CA cases on contract assignment: "Linden Gardens Trust Ltd v Lenesta Sludge Disposals Ltd" and "St Martins Corporation & St Martins Property Investments Ltd v Robert McAlpine & Sons Ltd", where a distinction was made between `benefit of` and `benefit under` the contract. | ||
| 650 | _aASSIGNMENT | ||
| 650 | _aBENEFIT OF CONTRACT | ||
| 650 | _aBENEFIT UNDER THE CONTRACT | ||
| 650 |
_aContracts _96232 |
||
| 650 | _aLINDENS GARDENS TRUST V LENESTA SLUDGE DISPOSALS | ||
| 650 | _aST MARTINS PROPERTY CORPORATION LTD V SIR ROBERT MCALPINE AND SONS LTD | ||
| 690 | _aBUILT ENVIRONMENT-BUILDING CONTRACT FORMS | ||
| 942 | _n0 | ||
| 948 | _c04/03/1997 | ||
| 999 |
_c35307 _d35307 |
||