The implication of a term of good faith in commercial leases

Much has been written in the past decade on the subject of the implication of a term of good faith in contracts in Australia, particularly since the judgment Priestley JA in Renard Constructions (ME) Pty Ltd v Minister for Public Works (1992) 26 NSWLR 234. Except for an early article by Rachael Mulheron, 'Good Faith and Commercial Leases: New Opportunities for the Tenant' (1996) 4 APLJ 223, very little else has been written with respect to the possible application of the doctrine to the commercial leases.With the advent of two later New South Wales Supreme Court decisions Alcatel Australia Ltd v Scarcella (1998) 44 NSWLR 349 and, more recently, Advance Fitness v Bondi Diggers [1999] NSWSC 264, the question of the application of the doctrine in the commercial leasing context has been examined. This article briefly considers the nature and substance of the doctrine against the background of the relationship of lessor and lessee and examines in some depth the Australian decisions on commercial leases where it has been sought, unsuccessfully, to apply the doctrine. The article concludes by suggesting that as a standard commercial lease usually covers the field of agreement between lessor and lessee and as a lessee has a high degree of statutory protection derived from equitable principles, there may be little room for the operation of the doctrine in this legal environment.

Good faith in contractual performance and enforcement : Australian doctrinal hurdles

In the ongoing and spirited debate about the relative merits of an obligation of good faith in contractual performance and enforcement, widely divergent views have been expressed about the appropriateness and content of the putative obligation. However, relatively less time has been devoted to discussion of the sparseness of tools available to facilitate doctrinal development and the hurdles necessarily imposed by such limited doctrinal resources. This article seeks to examine the Australian doctrinal position against the backdrop of good faith as it finds application in the wider global context.

Accountability for good faith in commercial dealing: The Carter v Boehm legacy 250 years on

In common law jurisdictions such as England, Australia, Canada and New Zealand good faith in contracting has long been recognised in specific areas of the law such as insurance law and franchising, and more recently the implied duties of good faith and mutual trust and convenience in employment contracts have generated a considerable volume of case law. Outside of these areas of law that may be characterised as being strongly‘relational’ in character,the courts in common law jurisdictions have been reluctant to embrace a more universal application of good faith in contracting and performance. However increasingly there are cases which support the proposition that there is a common law duty of good faith of general application to all commercial contracts. Most important in this context is the recent decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in Bhasin v Hrynew.1 However, this matter is by no means resolved in all common law jurisdictions. This article looks at the recent case law and literature and at various legislative incursions including statutes, codes of conduct and regulations impacting good faith in commercial dealings.

The implication of a term of good faith in commercial leases — A brief response

By way of response to Professor Duncan's article,1 this article examines the theoretical basis for the implication of contractual terms, particularly the implication of a term at law. In this regard the recent decision of Barrett J in Overlook v Foxtel [2002] NSWSC 17 is considered, to the extent that it provides guidance concerning the implication of an obligation of good faith in the context of a commercial contract. A number of observations are made which may be considered likely to have application to the relationship of commercial landlord and tenant. The conclusion reached is that although the commercial landlord and tenant contractual relationship is highly regulated, this may not deny a remedy to a tenant who is the victim of a landlord's 'bad faith'. Finally, the article concludes by considering the extent to which it may be possible to contractually exclude the implied obligation of good faith.

Disclosure in insurance law : contemporary and historical economic considerations

This article examines the importance of accurate classification and identification of risk with particular reference to the problem of adverse selection. It is argued that, historically, this concern was the paramount consideration influencing standard form contract formation and disclosure laws. The scope of its relevance today however is less apparent in that contemporary insurance contracting is conducted in a vastly different environment from that which prevailed at the time Lloyd's was better known as a coffee house. Accordingly, the second part of this article looks at the contemporary framework of information disclosure and those dynamics within it designed to elicit information weighing on risk forecasting : specifically, (a) direct inquiry and testing requirements; (b) signaling - or incentive based structuring of insurance contractual and (c) bargaining in the shadow of the utmost good faith doctrine. Finally, certain conclusions arising out of contemporary and historical economic considerations underpinning disclosure in insurance law are outlined.

Acquire a practical overview of 'good faith' in commercial contracting

The twists and turns in the ongoing development of the implied common law good faith obligation in the commercial contractual arena continue to prove fertile academic ground. Despite a lack of guidance from the High Court, the lower courts have been besieged by claims based, in part, on the implied obligation. Although lower court authority is lacking consistency and the ‘decisions in which lower courts have recognised the legitimacy of implication of a term of good faith vary in their suggested rationales’, the implied obligation may provide some comfort to a party to ‘at least some commercial contracts’ faced with a contractual counterpart exhibiting symptoms of bad faith.

Insurance and transport law : controlling insurance contract terms : Section 54 of the Insurance Contracts Act – compliance, recovery and accountability

Commonwealth legislation covering insurance contracts contains numerous provisions designed to control the operation and effect of terms in life and general insurance contracts. For example, the Life Insurance Act 1995 (Cth) contains provisions regulating the consequences attendant upon incorrect statements in proposals [1] and non-payment of premiums, [2] provides that an insurer may only exclude liability in the case of suicide if it has made express provision for such contingency in its policy, [3] and severely restricts the efficacy of conditions as to war risks. [4] The Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth) is even more intrusive and has a major impact upon contractual provisions in the general insurance field. It is beyond the scope of this note to explore all of these provisions in any detail but examples of controls and constraints imposed upon the operation and effect of contractual provisions include the following. A party is precluded from relying upon a provision in a contract of insurance if such reliance would amount to a failure to act with the utmost good faith. [5] Similarly, a policy provision which requires differences or disputes arising out of the insurance to be submitted to arbitration is void, [6] unless the insurance is a genuine cover for excess of loss over and above another specified insurance. [7] Similarly clause such as conciliation clauses, [8] average clauses, [9] and unusual terms [10] are given qualified operation. [11] However the provision in the Insurance Contracts Act that has the greatest impact upon, and application to, a wide range of insurance clauses and claims is s 54. This section has already generated a significant volume of case law and is the focus of this note. In particular this note examines two recent cases. The first, Johnson v Triple C Furniture and Electrical Pty Ltd [2012] 2 Qd R 337, (hereafter the Triple C case), is a decision of the Queensland Court of Appeal; and the second, Matthew Maxwell v Highway Hauliers Pty Ltd [2013] WASCA 115, (hereafter the Highway Hauliers case), is a decision of the Court of Appeal in Western Australia. This latter decision is on appeal to the High Court of Australia. The note considers too the decision of the New South Wales Court of Appeal in Prepaid Services Pty Ltd v Atradius Credit Insurance NV [2013] NSWCA 252 (hereafter the Prepaid Services case).These cases serve to highlight the complex nature of s 54 and its application, as well as the difficulty in achieving a balance between an insurer and an insured's reasonable expectations.

An agreement to negotiate a contract in good faith: No legal content and too uncertain for enforcement

The decision of Baldwin v Icon Energy Ltd [2015] QSC 12 is generally instructive upon the issue of the minimum required to enforce an agreement to negotiate .The language of these agreements is always couched in terms which include the expressions “good faith” and “reasonable endeavours” as descriptive of the yardstick of behaviour of each party in the intended negotiation to follow such an agreement. However, the mere statement of these intended characteristics of negotiation may not be sufficient to ensure that the agreement to negotiate is enforceable.

A growing good faith in contracts

The Supreme Court of Canada's ruling in Bhasin v Hrynew represents a significant step forward in harmonising the multiple strands of debate surrounding the existence of a good faith provision in common law contracting. Although a general principle of good faith (derived from Roman Law) is recognized by most civil law systems and a growing number of common law countries have embraced statutory provisions towards this end, Bhasin v Hrynew is argued to be a critical advance in catalysing uniform acceptance of good faith as a fundamental principle essential to support an increasingly integrated global commercial environment.

The Economics Of Civil Law Contract And Of Good Faith

Prepared for the Symposium in honour of Michael J. Trebilcock, 1-2 October 2009, in Toronto

The Universal Common Good: Faith-Based Partnerships and Sustainable Development

Partnership is increasingly espoused as the best relationship between members of the sustainable development aid chain, and implies a respect for the position of all and a desire to avoid a situation where one group dominates another. It also implies a form of relationship that is not just 'better' for the sake of it but that is more able to help achieve sustainable development. However, given the inevitable inequalities in power between donors that have the resources and field partners that do not it can be hard to put this ideal into practice. This paper explores the function of partnership within a group of closely related institutions that comprise the Catholic Church development chain. The research focussed on three Catholic Church based donors (one from the USA and two from Europe) and their partners in Abuja Ecclesiastical Province, Nigeria. Relationships between and within various strata of the Church in Nigeria were also examined. Relationships were 'patchy' at all levels. One of the donors had a significant operational presence in Nigeria and this was regarded by some respondents as a parallel structure that seriously undermined local bodies. However, while problems existed, there was a sense of inter-dependence arising from a shared sense of values and Catholic Social Teaching, which allowed partners to work through their stresses and conflicts. It is the innate sustainability of the aid chain itself founded upon a set of shared values that provided the space and time for problems to be addressed. Copyright (C) 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.