Kingston v. Preston

From Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
Revision as of 02:17, February 2, 2020 by Rezsue (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{Infobox Case Brief |court=Court of King’s Bench |citation=Lofft 194, 198*98 Eng. Rep. 606, 608 (1773) |date=1773 |subject=Contracts }} '''Facts''' Plaintiff contracted...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigationJump to search
Kingston v. Preston
Court Court of King’s Bench
Citation Lofft 194, 198
98 Eng. Rep. 606, 608 (1773)
Date decided 1773


Plaintiff contracted with the defendant to serve him for one and ¼ years in his trade as a silk-mercer for 200 pounds per year. Then at the end of the year, the defendant would give up his business to the plaintiff, along with a helper, for a fair value. The first part of the contract was completed, but the second part was not.


Whether a party is liable for a breach of contract when a condition precedent exists in the terms which has not yet been performed, but an independent part of the contract has already been completed by both parties.


Judgment for the defendant.


The part to be performed by the defendant was a condition precedent to good security for the payment by the plaintiff, which was not fulfilled.