Several contractual disputes arise over contracts signed by the parties, due to the failure to implement the contracts or obligations contained therein. The dispute may also be over the interpretation of contracts, the desire to terminate contracts by invalidating them, or the existence of compelling circumstances that require the termination of such contracts or the termination of contracts based on a breach by a party. When the contracts do not include termination terms and conditions, this may lead to a lengthy dispute between parties as each party only considers their own point of view for the termination without clear evidence or supporting documents other than his own conviction that the other party has breached the contract. Stephen Hudson Legal team works in a highly professional manner to represent clients in disputes before courts in cases related to contract interpretation, termination, obligation of parties to implement what is contained in them, and the claim of compensation for the breach. It is noteworthy that these types of disputes require the client to make a lot of effort before the dispute even begins to ensure the preservation of his rights and to take appropriate action to ensure a just result in his favor.
Disputes Arising from Non-Signing of Contracts with Performing Part of the Obligations
Many contractual disputes arise between the parties based on the parties exchanging contracts and commencing execution without the express consent of the contract receiving party. The signatory party usually urges that he did not sign the contract, which allows him the right to negotiate either during or after performing the obligation. However, in such cases, the court usually adopts the principle of the tacit consent or mutual consent, which means that when the contract receiving party agreed, the other party has begun to perform the obligations in accordance with the terms of the last contract and according to their correspondence. The Court considers that this may constitute a contractual acceptance and does not require the parties to sign the contract, unless the parties during the negotiations, have stipulated the signing of the contract for the agreement to take effect.
Disputes Arising Due to the Termination of the Contract and Compensation Claims for Such Termination
Many people sign contracts that do not include contract termination terms and conditions. Even though that parties think that by doing that they have obtained a guarantee of implementation, sometimes, it becomes a burden on the parties. Therefore, we always advise that there shall be terms and conditions for the termination of the contract, including:
Disputes that Arise Due to the Interpretation of the Contract or the Implicit Obligations Contained in it
Many contractual disputes arise due to the disagreement between parties on the interpretation of the contract, especially in the case of ambiguity in the wording of the contract. The dispute is often about a specific contractual obligation and to its extent. Therefore, the judge shall interpret the contract according to the nature of the transaction and the prevailing practices in the contracting transactions locally if the dispute is between two local parties. The regional aspect shall also be taken into consideration if the dispute is between a local party and a party from a neighboring state or globally if the dispute is between a local party and a party outside the neighboring states. In this regard, the judge hires subject-matter experts to determine the nature of local, regional and international practices to balance the rights and obligations of the parties. Moreover, the judge shall also review the contract negotiations to verify the parties’ understanding of the point of dispute to see if there is a prior understanding or prior knowledge agreed between the parties on the point in question.
Furthermore, contractual disputes may also arise due to obligations that were not included in the contract. However, one party may argue that is not included in the contract or not of a business nature, you cannot under any circumstances, as a contractor, include the details of every major or minor obligation in the contract. In this regard, the courts, as determined by the Civil Code on contracts, rely on the fact that obligations recognized as part of an obligation under custom or professional practice are part of the contract even if not mentioned by the parties, such as contracting works that are not often mentioned in the contract, but are known to be part of the contract. Accordingly, such matters depend on the ability of the parties to indicate whether the obligation that is not mentioned in the contract is part of the contract or not.