Breach Of Duty Of Care - the word
Don't want ads? Subscribe or login now. Stay ahead of the curve In the legal profession, information is the key to success. Law provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition. Access to case data within articles numbers, filings, courts, nature of suit, and more. Access to attached documents such as briefs, petitions, complaints, decisions, motions, etc. Breach Of Duty Of Care
Carleton Condominium Corporation No. Callow Inc. Present: Wagner C. Pursuant to clause 9 of the winter maintenance contract, Baycrest was entitled to terminate that agreement if Callow failed to give satisfactory service in accordance with its terms. In earlyBaycrest decided to terminate the winter maintenance agreement but chose not to inform Callow of its decision at that time.
Throughout the spring and summer ofCallow had discussions with Baycrest regarding a renewal of the winter maintenance Dufy.
Breach Of Duty Of Care Following those discussions, Callow thought that it was likely to get a two-year renewal of the winter maintenance contract and that Baycrest was satisfied with its services. During the summer ofCallow performed work above and beyond the summer maintenance contract at no charge, which it hoped would act as an incentive for Baycrest to renew the winter maintenance agreement. Baycrest informed Callow of its decision to terminate the winter maintenance agreement in September Callow Caee a statement of claim for breach of contract, alleging that Baycrest acted in bad faith.
Thank you for sharing!
The trial judge held that the organizing principle of good faith performance and the duty of honest performance were engaged. She was satisfied that Baycrest actively deceived Callow from the time the termination decision was Berach to Septemberand found that Baycrest acted in bad faith by withholding that information to ensure Callow performed the summer maintenance contract and by continuing to represent that the contract was not in danger despite knowing that Callow was taking on extra tasks to bolster the chances of the winter maintenance contract being renewed.
She awarded damages to Callow in order to place it in the same position as if the breach had Breach Of Duty Of Care occurred.
The Court of Appeal set aside the judgment at first instance, holding that the trial judge erred by improperly expanding the duty of honest performance beyond the terms of the Oc maintenance agreement. Further, it held that any deception in the communications during the summer of related to a new contract not yet in existence, namely the renewal that Callow hoped to negotiate, and therefore was not directly linked to the performance of the winter contract.]
Obviously you were mistaken...
I consider, that the theme is rather interesting. I suggest all to take part in discussion more actively.
In my opinion you are not right. I can prove it. Write to me in PM, we will discuss.
Big to you thanks for the necessary information.
Rather valuable piece