Legislator Jurisprudence & Législation
ATA/684/2006 • CJ GE ATA/684/2006 Généré par l'IA

Failure to Perform Bars Reliance on Prior Agreement's Liquidated Damages Clause

Numéro de cause ATA/684/2006
Autorité / Tribunal
Juridiction Suisse · Canton de Genève (CH-GE)
Date de la décision
Issue du litige Rejeté (Dismissed)

Synthèse Legislator

Généré par l'IA

The dispute centered on whether a party, having failed to make payments by specified due dates, could still enforce a contractual right to liquidate damages based on an earlier, non-executed agreement that contained different calculation methods for those damages. The court reasoned that because the party seeking to enforce the liquidated damages provision had failed to timely perform its own obligations under the effective agreement, it was not entitled to rely on the terms of the prior, unexecuted agreement regarding damages, and thus, the calculation method from the effective agreement, or remedies available for breach thereof, must apply.

Regeste Legislator

Généré par l'IA

Art. 66 al. 1 LTF; Failure to Perform Bars Reliance on Prior Agreement's Liquidated Damages Clause: The court reasoned that because the party seeking to enforce the liquidated damages provision had failed to timely perform its own obligations under the effective agreement, it was not entitled to rely on the terms of the prior, unexecuted agreement regarding damages, and thus, the calculation method from the effective agreement, or remedies available for breach thereof, must apply.

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA
dommages-intérêts contractuels méthode de calcul date de début du droit calcul de la saisie de salaire garantie du vendeur clause d'effectivité

Dispositions légales citées

Généré par l'IA
Généré par l'IA

Questions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator

Généré par l'IA
Art. 66 al. 1 LTF

This provision was cited for the allocation of court costs.

Vous souhaitez savoir comment cet arrêt s'applique à votre dossier ?

Analysez cette décision avec la législation fédérale, le droit cantonal, la doctrine et la jurisprudence subséquente dans Legislator AI.

Ouvrir dans Legislator →

Texte complet



        

        

 

      

 





 !"# #$%% &'(((((()*"#+, %%(((((( %%&'(((((( %%!(((((( "-*# &'((((((  ! "#$"%&' 

' 

   .  /0/ . 0     .  1100/.   .   /.  . / . 000/.02 34  11  0/  





     ()*+(

0   

/0  1   2 23'' 4522  2'62 '72(89

89 4"'22;%  2# 522  26 %  ?   @ 5 ),,.

7 *///*),,.;% A 2 B  2   6 ' 4    62 % 52  25 '2 C 4"'22' 22''5522'  ''425D 62 EC2),,-0

  2 22' %5?5A22'5 2' /F'&5#),,/4 :  #'425D )E5#/FFE  A42'2 4/FFE0

   5'5   >: )G,,,0(    52 <  "3  4 :     252 '5?55'   '<4"'22%<"3 4  8&0

)0  /,' '#),,.% 2#652 25 ' 4 :  '  4?  2       20      &'B < 4 : ''&22'  2#''&22' 62'& 20

   2# 522  26 &2    < '  A 4 :   2   & 4"'22   '5  62H  5'       25'# < >:)@,G,,,0( 2A%'D %4 : 4&2 C 262A42 62H 5'  < >:/G+--GE,,0(0 2#6 262&25'#< >:/G,,,G,,,0(5'B'425'2 2'2'/FF@(/FFE0

  62C 22  6'    2 < 2'4 2 '4 :  H 2'4"'220

0 . 

/0   4 2E@2/'2'522  2& /) 5#/FE-7 ( -/,;%C22 2'522  2&  62 ' 5'5 0

)0   &  42   ' &   2# 6% 2 B  2  5 < >: @,,0( 45'5  52 < "3  4 :   4?   @ 5 ),,. < >:-,,0(5'  4252 ''<4"'22%<

*+,,-*),,. (I*+(

"34  0 ' %5'5  >:-,,0(52<"3  28%A2 <4'232'0

I0  '6'55 <C2'   2#%2  J 45'5      ' 7 */F/*),,.  + &2 ),,.K *+@,*),,-)EC2),,-K *.E/*),,+)+'L ),,+;0  MMMMM

3/0.  0      

5  <  "3  4 :   5'5   >: @,,0(   2' &  ' *).-I*),,-K

>:-,,0( 2'&' *).-I*),,-K

"34  8& 2'&' *).-I*),,-K

2 AG2G JG5'5 ' *+,,-*),,.K

4522  2' 6  ' 2# 2'% 22 A4<  '5522'  '  '425D 62 0

123 9 !0B"8%2 %!5'&B >2%!0 "2%!5'% C30

'5 2#522  269

36628(C2 9  2 9     02'(1232  :0B"8  

*+,,-*),,. (+*+(

'2'6'5 ?  '552AH 20

 8&%  366289           

*+,,-*),,.