What is the test for establishing a reasonable price in a commercial contract?
Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada
The following excerpt is from Belanger, Clarke, Follett & Mcgettigan v. My Newfoundland Adventure Tours Incorporated, 2010 CanLII 17985 (NL PC):
In Matchim v. BGI Atlantic Inc., [2010] N.J. No. 41 (C.A.), it was held at paragraph 85, that there is “ancient authority which recognizes that where parties have agreed contractually but have not stipulated a specific price (e.g. agreed on a reasonable price) or a party, without writing, has requested goods or services” then “the law implies an obligation to pay a reasonable price.” AN APPLICATION OF THESE PRINCIPLES TO THIS CASE
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
What is the implied term in a commercial contract? (Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada)
What is the test for withdrawing counsel from opposing counsel by reason of lateral transfer? (Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada)
Is there an established exception to the settlement privilege? (Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada)
What is the necessity for parties to consider electronic evidence provisions alongside more established rules? (Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada)
Is there any difference between the construction and interpretation of mixed fact and law in determining the existence of an oral contract? (Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada)
Is it an established exception to use of privileged correspondence to prove confirmation in response to a limitations defence? (Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada)
What is the test for establishing a business as an investment vehicle? (Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada)
What is the test for establishing that poor and ignorant persons entitled to a reversionary interest have been induced to sell at an undervalue? (Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada)
In a sexual assault trial where there are two versions of the same events, what is the role of the trial judge in determining whether the accused has proven his case beyond a reasonable doubt? (Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada)
Is there any reason why the Court has a reluctance to re-open a decision already rendered? (Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada)
