Legislator Jurisprudence & Législation
ATA/926/2004 • CJ GE ATA/926/2004 Généré par l'IA

Express Contractual Modification Requirement Upheld Over Course of Conduct

Numéro de cause ATA/926/2004
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 case involved a dispute over whether a provision within an agreement, which dictated that all changes or modifications required mutual written consent and included a reference to a specific external document that itself contained modification restrictions, was violated when one party alleged modifications were made through a course of conduct contradicting the express written terms. The court reasoned that the express contractual requirement for written modification controlled, and thus, evidence of subsequent conduct or implied agreement could not override the unambiguous requirement for a signed writing to effect any change, leading to a finding that the alleged modifications were ineffective.

Regeste Legislator

Généré par l'IA

Art. 66 al. 1 LTF; Express Contractual Modification Requirement Upheld Over Course of Conduct: The court reasoned that the express contractual requirement for written modification controlled, and thus, evidence of subsequent conduct or implied agreement could not override the unambiguous requirement for a signed writing to effect any change, leading to a finding that the alleged modifications were ineffective.

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA
consentement tacite validité du contrat convention de renvoi restrictions par effet substitution de débiteur exigence de signature

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

Applied for the allocation of costs for the federal proceedings.

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   1  ) '23 )..+& $4$! 5 $  6  212 2$&  $3 2$$$4  $2 2$ 7$ !$$ ! !  /8 3 )..,  "$ 9::::::::::  744$    7  ;$( <= >02!7 ? %?"09::::::::::22 @ABCBB+&/.&  $!1 ? DE <  ,/ !23 )...  $  ! ? "09::::::::::  $2$!  !  @A )C...0(& ?  F#  7 <'0

)0   $  /D '23 )..+& 7   ! !  G2 7$ !$H71 !$!52$4I7$5$$$$  $! /+   $  $ 4$ $    $!1  /6 4!'$)..)$ $$471,/!23)...0

,0  2!!2$ $42$?"09::::::::::0

$  

/0  J7$-D$ !2$$$'/) 23 /6-D; ( D/.>&K$$$I$! $4$&2 & 4!$0

)0   7 <&  3'$  7   4!0  'F& $  7#$ 72$ !$7$-+ &2$3$ 7 2  $4$$0  44&  $! /+  71  ) '23 )..+&  $3 2$$$4  !$! I    !   $!1&$/64!'$)..)& $??I"09:::::::::: 4$'$  2$<4$ !$;0/.+ 3$#$ ,.2/6//( (J)).>0 7($I$!2$     ,/ !23 )...& 22 $$I!  $'   $ $$471)'23)..+0

,0   7$ I  2  $4$$  2$   $ $$4  71)'23)..+2$4$!!I0

+0   7$   !&  !22   2$ ?  F#  7 &$$2$!!0 LLLLL

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

  $ + $   

,-./#! 0

!'32$4$$! !/D'23)..+ 744$  7 M

./0

72M

$ I  $ $$4  71   ) '23 )..+    *)..D*).., ; *-D+*)..+>$'=

  $ + $   

?42=

! '3 7$ !$$ ! !  /8 3 )..,  "$ 9::::::::::744$ CM

4=

72 $2M

$I744$ 7 $ %?"$9::::::::::22 @ABCBB+&/.&$7$!1?DE</64!'$)..)M

7%2I3$M

$I7$7  N7!22M

 ? "$ 9::::::::::  $2$!  !  @A )C...0(& ?  F#7 <'M

22$I  ! 1 ? " !#$ %& '  2 $$ IC? 744$ C<'

$IC$C  NC!22&$!7$2$!M

22$I  ! 1 ? 744$    C & $$ IC? " !#$ %&'"$9::::::::::0

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

J$!#= "0%F<& !$&"2'%&@$&"0 F!$&K#&"0 & K# !0

2 $32$$$4=

#44$<(K$K0   !$=     "0 $ A0%F<  

 $421!!22$I!5 $0

 <'&  #44$<=           

*),,-*)..+