Does a contract between the parties constitute a juristic reason?
Alberta, Canada
The following excerpt is from Canniff v. Gardner, 2008 ABQB 523 (CanLII):
It has long been established that the existence of a contract between the parties constitutes one of the established categories that will support the existence of a juristic reason: See Rathwell v. Rathwell, 1978 CanLII 3 (SCC), [1978] 2 S.C.R. 436, at p. 455.
"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
In what circumstances will a party be bound by the elements of a contract where the contract is not enforceable when the contract was signed? (Alberta, Canada)
Can a party who dictates different terms for a contract already formed be considered to be refusing to perform the contract as written? (Alberta, Canada)
Is a party who is not an applicant in a restrictive covenant action against a party that is not a party to the restrictive covenant? (Alberta, Canada)
Is a contract enforceable for breach of contract when the contract is not enforceable? (Alberta, Canada)
Can a party who signed a contract with respect to a property without the consent of the other party to disclaim the property? (Alberta, Canada)
Is a contract between a party and party entitled to enrichment and deprivation? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the test for a contract where a party contracts to cut for a quantity of wood and haul and deliver the wood at a time and to a place mentioned? (Alberta, Canada)
Can a party be held liable for negligent misrepresentation in the context of a contract? (Alberta, Canada)
Does an agent have to be personally liable on a contract where the principal of the contract is not personally liable? (Alberta, Canada)
Can facts establish a breach of contract and arise from carelessness in the performance of the contract? (Alberta, Canada)
