- Published: October 15, 2022
- Updated: October 15, 2022
- University / College: University of Canberra
- Level: Master's
- Language: English
- Downloads: 48
Chapter 16 Discussion Contracts are governed by law, and all parties involved in the contract are required to adhere to the agreements made and the binding laws. The contract between the Nine Mile Mine and Lewis involves rights to timber. The mine is the location of interest to Lewis. Forbidding Lewis to enter the land as he began his work was against the contract. The claim that Lewis lacked sufficient equipment could have been evaluated before the contract was signed, a scenario that in this case was ignored.
The lawsuit filed by Lewis is critically dependent on evidence. This is because the market value in the Nine Mile’s side is backed up by evidence, and Lewis must also argue his case by providing concrete evidence to back up his case, and contradict Nine Mile. The evidence bout market value has already been established to be decisive. This followed the fact that Nine Mile met its burden in that case, while Lewis had no evidence.
The summary judgment motion favors the Nine Mile Mine. To start with, Lewis lacks sufficient equipment for the job. Although this should have been accounted for before signing the contract, lack of market value evidence or any other evidence to back Lewis’s lawsuit favors the Nine Mile. Lack of sufficient equipment meant that Nine Mile faced loss threats. On the other hand, Lewis was not said to have an alternative means of meeting the loss. Therefore, the summary judgment motion favors the Nine Mile by great margin prior to the evidence provided. Lewis on the other hand holds no position to qualify for lost profits or consequential damages that would result from the signed contract.