81,814
edits
Repudiation: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
If your contract stipulates that [[time is of the essence]], then yes. If not, then it will depend on the circumstances. If the [[failure to pay]] was due to a [[force majeure]]-style external event, probably not. If the failure to pay was accompanied by an extended middle finger, more likely. | If your contract stipulates that [[time is of the essence]], then yes. If not, then it will depend on the circumstances. If the [[failure to pay]] was due to a [[force majeure]]-style external event, probably not. If the failure to pay was accompanied by an extended middle finger, more likely. | ||
===In the [[Master trading agreement|Master Trading Agreements]]=== | |||
Both the {{2002ma}} and the {{gmsla}} have a repudiation as a specific {{isdaprov|Event of Default}}<ref>{{gmslaprov|Repudiation}} under the {{gmsla}} and {{isdaprov|Repudiation of Agreement}} under the {{2002ma}}.</ref>, though it doesn’t really need to be — if the other guy has indicated he doesn’t regard the {{t|contract}} as being binding on him, you can rescind and sue for damages, and those damages are hardly likely to be lower (or, really, different) than you would get under the formalised closeout procedure. But anyway, a some what arid debate all told; people don’t really argue about repudiation. | |||
{{sa}} | {{sa}} | ||