Thanks a million!
On Oct 8, 12:33 pm, SarahMcC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It is to do with whether the sub-contractor has provided any
> consideration for the promise that the contractor will pay him extra
> on the completion of the work. The 'common sense' approach is that the
> contractor obtains a benefit ('obviates a disbenefit') from him
> completing the work for the alternative would be that he would have to
> find someone else to do the work.
>
> Although it was already within the sub-contractors duties, he was
> incapable of performing them without the additional payments... so the
> consideration is the fact that the sub-contractor agreed to complete
> the work in return for the extra money!
>
> On 8 Oct, 09:44, Doodles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Would anyone be able to give me a quick run-down on the connection
> > here . . . brain not able to decipher it this morning . . . thanks!- Hide
> > quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "FE-1
Study Group" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.ie/group/FE-1-Study-Group?hl=en-GB
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
