Lambord North Central v. Butterworth, Case Study Example

Central legal issue(s)

Breach of contract due to late payment and the pursuant of payment from the defendant:

The case points that the plaintiff was not able to completely respond to his sworn responsibility in consideration with the agreement formed with the accuser because of bank technical issues as well as late response to the responsibility to pay. Practical options of payment were not taken into account by the plaintiff even though there was a chance to do so. The defendant has given the plaintiff a chance to complete payment accordingly, however, it could be noted through case details that the plaintiff was not able to respond hence causing the accuser to move towards taking the option of retrieving the item that the plaintiff has bought on credit while also insisted on the consideration over the need to call out for the defendant to completely pay for the responsibilities left in his care.

Facts of the case

The accuser or the respondent plaintiff is noted as a finance company that lends money to clients who need the money at the time to buy a property. The financial company provides the clients the chance to directly purchase the property at present and have them pay for the full amount in later time. The plaintiff, Laurence Arthur Butterworth, agreed to the idea by which such service is provided. Relatively, the plaintiff agreed to the payment terms and other points of agreement that the accuser has imposed [especially in relation to the collection of the bought item].

While the plaintiff was able to submit payment during the first and second scheduled agreement;, it could be realized that the failure to pay for the amount imposed in relation to the schedule set by the accuser has caused the agreement to fail accordingly. Notably, it could be realized that the capacity of the organization to take on the option of imposing the agreement-basics depend on their personal power and authority provided to them by the legal sanctions they have imposed. Due to the failure, the accuser has pursued to push through with the retrieval of the item purchased. Later on the accuser also insisted that the plaintiff pay for the rate of payment still left out to be paid. However, even after several warnings and calls, the plaintiff remains unresponsive.

The cause of action or claim involved in the case

Carrying out the third section of the agreement was deemed necessary especially in relation to the fact that the plaintiff has actually agreed to complete the said aspect of response especially that the accuser believes that they have already done what was necessary to have him cooperate and respond to the call accordingly. It could also be assumed that the accuser believes that when it comes to this matter, the accuser knows that they have already given the plaintiff enough time to give attention to his responsibility. Given this, they feel that the need to impose on the third section of the agreement. Taking the item that has been purchased by the plaintiff was necessary. Practically, it could be realized that this was the best option to take into account to buy out time for the plaintiff to respond to the matter. Relatively, this option allowed the company to be more confident about the transaction that comes into account especially in terms of legal matters.

Court decision

Due to the series of deferred payments that were not given attention to by the plaintiff, the court arrived at a decision by which the plaintiff needs to respond to. The retrieval of the item purchased by the plaintiff was deemed justifiable by the court. Nevertheless, there is still a need to pay for the payment left out after the retrieval of the said item. This movement is needed to be given attention especially in relation to the fact that the court recognizes the need to understand and accept the fact that the item has already incurred a differential value due to the time that the item was in possession of the plaintiff. This time of use ought to be reduced from the value from which it has been resold to other owners. The court sided this preference as it would respond to the value that is recognized important by the accuser and justifies the responsibility that the plaintiff has towards the accuser.

Analysis of the decision

The court’s final decision responds accordingly to the need of providing higher value towards the accuser’s desire to regain most of the value it has lost. Notably, it could be understood that somehow the emergence of the need to consider such values as major part of the agreement is the central consideration that the court gives attention to. Notably, the justification of the retrieval of the item purchased by the plaintiff was recognized accordingly to the sections of the agreement formed by the plaintiff and the accuser. The power given by the legal sanctions established through such agreement is given proper attention to especially in the hope of mandating a sense of authority on the part of the accuser over the actions that are insisted as part of the responsibilities of the plaintiff.

The recognition of the deterioration of the value of the item when it was resold at a much lower price compared to its principal amount is necessary especially that the item was already noted as second-hand. The value then lost through time ought to be repaid by the plaintiff. It is strongly insisted that the capacity of the company to retrieve the value it has lost through time with which the agreement has been established accordingly.

Conclusion

This case further insists that somehow, the emergence of value-versus-time options of recognition ought to be given attention to especially in relation to situations that involve item revaluation. It could be realized that with the decision released by the court that the attention to value-detail has been given specific consideration. With the recognition of value and added development on the case due to the needed insistence of how the value given high regard by the parties involved in the situation, the case closes with the desire to give back the value towards each of the individuals and institutions involved in the case.

The breach of contract that has been considered as one of the primary problems of this case specifically gives attention to how the agreements are formed and how they ought to be recognized and respected accordingly. Although it may have seemed that there have been some significant technical issues resulting to the failure of the plaintiff to pay for the promised amount, the accuser has already provided enough time to respond to the situation accordingly. Relatively, it could be understood that somehow, the failure to respond to such agreement made it possible for the case to be pushed through for examination of the higher court.

Work Cited

England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions. http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/1986/5.html. (retrieved on December 23, 2014).