arbiter
JournalsAccount

‘Dependent’ promises, failed contractual performance, and the influence of civil law on the ‘options’ of the innocent party: White & Carter revisited

Lee Aitken

Australian Bar Review2013article
ABDC A
Weight
0.26

Abstract

nWhite a Carter (Councils) reconfirmed that an rinnocentr party may fullynperform its side of a bargain, and sue for the contract price, if thenrco-operationr in performance by the other party in breach is not required.nThis harsh view seems to cut across notions of refficient breachr andnunderscores the residual importance of specific performance as a remedy.nWhite a Carter (Councils) was a Scots decision of the House of Lords -nrecent Scottish, and English authority, emphasises the possibility of rspecificnimplementr as a condign remedy for breach, a matter arguably insufficientlynconsidered in the area of remedies for breach of contract generally.

Cite this paper

@article{lee2013,
  title        = {{‘Dependent’ promises, failed contractual performance, and the influence of civil law on the ‘options’ of the innocent party: White & Carter revisited}},
  author       = {Lee Aitken},
  journal      = {Australian Bar Review},
  year         = {2013},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

‘Dependent’ promises, failed contractual performance, and the influence of civil law on the ‘options’ of the innocent party: White & Carter revisited

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.26

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.00 × 0.4 = 0.00
M · momentum0.20 × 0.15 = 0.03
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.