Business Law

Jacob and Young v Kent (230 N .Y . 239I . FactsThe complainant and the defendant entered into a contract whereby the former agreed to construct a democracy residence for the latter . The consideration of the contract amounted to 77 ,000 . except , complainant sued for the recovery of the remaining balance amounting to 3 ,483 .46 notably , in the contract , it was specified that the pipes to be spendd should be that of breeding manufacturing business (Jacob and Young v Kent , 230 N .Y . 239 . hardly , the pipes applyd by the plaintiff were not that of Reading Manufacturer . Meanwhile , the pipes mystify already been built on the walls of the put forward . When the plaintiff demanded for a certificate of bound , he was denied . or else , the plaintiff was demanded to do a new work and use the cross off specified by the de fendant . The plaintiff resisted to do a rework . Hence , the suitII .

Contention of the PartiesThe plaintiff in the vitrine at bar contends that the woodland of the brands used were of the equal quality as with the pipes of Reading Manufacturer . Besides , the use of the pipes was not caused by a fraudulent intention . moreover sooner , it was a result of the oversight and inattention of the subcontractors (230 N .Y . 239On the some other hand , the defendant demands specific performance from the plaintiff by changing the pipes with the pipes from Reading ManufacturerIII . IssueShould the uniformity of the pipe s used be admitted and qualifies completion ! of...If you want to get a full essay, post it on our website: OrderCustomPaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper