Reciprocal Obligations in Contractual Non-Performance

The case concerned a contractual dispute where one party alleged non-performance by the other, who in turn claimed that the alleged breach was justified because the opposing party had failed to fulfill a prior, related obligation necessary for the performance to commence. The Court rejected the appeal, affirming that the lower court correctly applied the principle of reciprocal obligations, reasoning that a party cannot invoke the non-performance of a contract by another if they themselves failed to fulfill a prerequisite condition or obligation that was necessary for the defendant's performance to become due or executable.