Questions On The County Court Money Claims Online

a.)When Cut and Chop entered into a contract to sell the business premises on 1 May

The Plaintiff is claiming $35 million from the State of NSW, which is purported to be vicariously liable for the Land and Environment Court and Pain J [1]. This claim includes nullifying Pain J’s judgment [14], and it is accompanied by Motions to uphold Lloyd J’s dismissal and refund the Plaintiff’s filing fees [2].

The appellant, Parkview Queensland Pty Ltd (“Parkview”), is a building contractor who commenced construction of a residential property development under a standard form building contract with Fortia funds Management Ltd (“Fortia”), the developer. Fortia financed the construction under a loan facility with the Bank of Western Australia Ltd (“BankWest”).

Codelfa Construction (Plaintiff) had a contract with State Rail Authority NSW (Defendant) to excavate the tunnels for the railway in New South Wales. The contract agreed to complete the work in assured dates and finish it within 130 weeks, to finish work Codelfa were suppose to work three shifts a day and 7 days a week; initially Codelfa Construction was working accordingly. The work was to dig a tunnel so offcourse it was very noisy and caused some vibrations which were annoying to the surrounding residents which led to application quite a few application of nuisance and after a while Codelfa Construction had an injunction where they were forced to reduce the work hours by two shifts a day and not working on Sundays. The problem started here as the working hours were reduced so Codelfa Constructions was not able to finish the work in the set period of time which was given according to the contract therefore Codelfa Construction’s budget did exceed than mentioned in the contract and they needed more time to finish the work.

Mr. James Bowan, Supervisor and Ms. Courtney Alday has been employed by the Domino Realty Management Company that manages the properties and upkeep at the Versailles on the Lake Properties. Lastly, these two witnesses had claimed that they were both employed within and during the time period of the alleged CT claim. Hence, these two witnesses whom each had direct contact and supervision of the claimant were not informed by the claimant or by any witnesses for the claimant any relevant documentation and evidence in support of the injuries pertaining to the claimants knees, neck, back and other multiple body parts, which have not specifically made within the CT claim.

This case is between the (plaintiff) Mrs. White and the (defendants) Patrick Gibbs and Stand Alone Properties, L.L.C. as O’Malley’s Tavern. A Motion of Summary Judgment on behalf of O’Malley’s Tavern in the US District Court of Northern District of Indiana. Is being argued/presented.

We write today to present you with a demand for settlement and the supporting documentation for our demand. As you know, we represent Ms. Betty Brath in the matter of a grievous injury she suffered due to the negligence of your insured. Ms. Brath has reached maximum medical improvement but unfortunately will never fully recover. We are able to calculate her past and future medical expenses at approximately $34,177.73. Her general damages at trial will be approximately $170,000.00. We therefore demand payment in the amount of $204,177.73. We elaborate on this demand below.

At this hearing I had Mr. George testify he operates Robert George Design Group, LTD. That he knows the claimant and has known him since around 2007. He describes his work as doing landscaping, outdoor masonry and patio work. He testified he has a subcontractor relationship with the claimant. He said the claimant’s expertise were in such things as roofing, sheet rocking, painting and equipment maintenance.

This court case involved the plaintiff Hamptons Landscaping Service Inc., who had been represented by Lieb at Law, P.C. This side of the case then was seeking summary judgment to recover $17,217.00, from the defendants Michael & Frances Sherman who had been represented by Kelly and Hulme, P.C. which was alleging breach of contract and unjust enrichment causes of action. The Sherman’s had crossed moved seeking an order dismissing Hampton's complaint, also had asserting that Second

The error was obvious and can be proven as the owner forgot unintentionally to “insert the number of weeks specified by the tender in the appropriate blank.” The contractor asked to be given the opportunity to show to the court and to the owner his estimate.

Appellant’s dwelling was a prefabricated home located upon a 5-acre lot which contains the home as well as several other buildings. (ADD. 9.) It is located at the end of 264th Street, all of which comprises a unique property. Appellant testified that to restore his Property to a pre-damage condition, it would require a prefabricated “like” home to be added to the Property. (ADD. 28.) Appellant produced an estimate for the “like” home. (ADD. 40-41.)

As is all too often the case, a payment dispute accompanied the conclusion of this substantial construction project. In early 2007, Metropolitan refused to pay WCS several million dollars due for the labor and materials furnished to the project. (E. 917). As such, WCS filed a complaint to establish a mechanic’s lien. (Id.). In consideration for WCS’s release of

Peter booked a room for a week at Macgregor Hotel. At the reception desk, where he made the booking, was a notice limiting the hotel’s liability for loss of, damage to guest’s property.

The applicant is seeks a grant under section 15E(1) of the Debtors (Scotland) Act 1987 of warrant for diligence in advance of a hearing on the application. The application has a prima facie case on the merits of the action because there is a significant concern over Mr Smith’s ability to repay the sum of £8,500 owed to the pursuer because it has been found that Mr Smith owes a debt within the region of £20,000 to the HMRC for which a petition was presented to the Edinburgh Sheriff Court for the sequestration of Mr Smith. It is suspected that the hearing on the 1st March 2013 has been continued. Furthermore, it appears that Mr Smith has a string of creditors who are intending to bring a petition against the The Internet Café, which operates

Introduction: In this assignment I will go over a few legal terms in relation to contract law. I will also talk about a few precedents that help explain the law.