Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
Subject_1 Reparation Subject_2 Obligation Subject_3 Copartnery Subject_4 Contract — Competency. Facts: Held that an action of damages for breach of contract is relevant only where the contract of which breach is averred is capable of specific implement.
Terms of a document which were held ( revg . Lord Craighill, Ordinary— diss . Lord Shand) not to contain termini habiles , out of which a contract of copartnery could be formed.
Observations ( per curiam ) on the appropriate remedy in different classes of actions for breach of contract.
It was further stated that the defender's business was very profitable, and yielded a gross profit of about £5000 a year.
The defender answered that he was justified in declining to take the pursuer into partnership, from his temper, behaviour, and manner when in his employment.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.