Insufficient; disproportionate; lack of effectiveness or compliance with a prescribed standard or measure. Insufficient damage. See DAMAGE. Insufficient price. A term used to indicate desire or sufficient consideration for an item sold or a price that would normally be completely disproportionate to its intrinsic value. State v. Purcell, 131 MB. 312, 33 pp. W. 13; Stephens v. Ozbourne, 107 Tend. 572, 64 pp.
903, 89 am. St Rep. 957. Unzureichender Rechtsbehelf. For the purposes of the rule that equity does not consider an action if there is an adequate remedy, this does not mean that it is not necessary to recover funds or damages in court, but the remedy is considered insufficient if it is inappropriate or fit for purpose. for example, when the remedy sought is preventive rather than compensated. Cmickshank v. Bidwell, 176 U. p. 73.
20 Sup. Ct. 280, 44 L. Ed. 377; Safe Deposit & Trust Co. v. Anniston (C.C.) 96 Fed. 663; Crawford County vs. Foliage, 110 Iowa, 355, 81 N.W. 590. A particular benefit is ordered only for reasons of equity, having regard to all the circumstances of the case.
The decisive factor is whether the court must, in equity and in good conscience, actually perform the contract, since compensation for pecuniary damages would not sufficiently compensate the plaintiff for the injury. Search the dictionary of legal abbreviations and acronyms for acronyms and/or abbreviations that contain “Insufficient”. A contract cannot be expressly performed if the plaintiff, because of superior bargaining power, unfairly exploits the defendant who is in a weakened position. This situation arises when the consideration (the inducement to enter into a contract) is so insufficient as to “shock the conscience” or when it comes to “brutal transactions”, for example when the defendant is ill. Failure to disclose to the defendant essential facts which, had they been discovered, would have prevented the conclusion of a contract is a particular ground for refusal of performance. The insolvency of the defendant, which prevents the plaintiff from collecting damages, does not determine whether a particular benefit is granted. The court only considers whether there is an adequate remedy, but not whether the defendant has the financial means to pay for the judgment. A particular benefit awards the claimant what he actually negotiated in the contract and not damages (financial compensation for loss or harm caused by someone else`s unlawful conduct) because he did not receive it; A particular advantage is therefore a fair remedy rather than a remedy. By obliging the parties to do exactly what they had agreed, fuller and more perfect justice is obtained than by awarding damages for breach of contract. SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE, corrective actions.
The actual performance of a contract by the party who is required to perform it. 2.De many contracts are entered into by the parties to do certain things, and then the contracting parties neglect or refuse to fulfill their obligations. In such cases, the aggrieved party usually has a remedy and can claim damages for breach of contract; In many cases, however, seeking damages is an incompetent remedy, and the party seeks to restore some performance of the agreement. 3. It is a general rule that the courts of equity have jurisdiction over the particular performance of a contract where the courts do not have an adequate remedy; and it does not matter whether the object relates to immovable property or personal property. 1 crazy. Cpl. Pr. 295; 2 History of equation § 717; 1 Sim & Stu. 607; 1 p. Wms. 570; 1 Sch.
& Lef. 553; 1 vern. 159. 4. However, the rule is limited to cases where the courts cannot provide an adequate remedy. 2 History of eq. § 718; Eden on Inj. Cap.
3, p. 27. See generally 2 History of equation chap. 18, §§ 712 to 792; 1 ves. Jr. 96, 148, 184, 211, 495; 2 Supp. to Ves. Jr. 65, 164; Fonb. Gl. b.
1, c. 1, p. 5; Sugd. Sell. 145. Damages are insufficient when the estimate is difficult to make, such as in a supply contract, a written agreement in which one party agrees to purchase from the other party all goods of a certain type that it may need for its business. The same principle applies if the movable property is scarce and cannot be easily redeemed on the open market, even if it is not unique. If the same contract combines single and ordinary elements, the entire contract is expressly executed. Insufficient evidence is evidence that does not meet the burden of proof and is insufficient to prove a fact. In a trial, if the prosecution has closed their argument and the judge finds that they have not met their burden of proof, the judge may dismiss the case (even before the defense has presented its share) due to insufficient evidence. In criminal cases, for example, the burden of proof is to prove beyond doubt, and non-compliance leads to insufficient evidence.
Damages are insufficient if the plaintiff sues for breach of contract and the amount awarded is less than the proven amount. A particular benefit may be granted by a court in the exercise of its equitable powers only after determining whether a valid and enforceable contract exists and assessing the relief sought. As a general rule, a certain performance is applied in the case of non-contractual acts where the financial loss is insufficient, in particular if the contract relates to immovable property or a single movable property (personal property). Compensation for breach of a contract for the sale of ordinary personal property is in most cases easily verifiable and refundable, so a certain service is not provided. A certain service is denied if the money would adequately compensate the claimant for the damage. After considering the subject matter of the contract, the court itself decides whether the money would be appropriate. When it comes to land, money is not enough because land is traditionally considered unique, as no two plots are the same. The award of damages does not entitle the plaintiff to acquire the same land elsewhere.
Any person who has acted unfairly or in bad faith in the case in which he or she seeks redress shall be denied a fair remedy, regardless of any improper conduct on the part of the defendant. Misconduct need not be such that it can be punished as a criminal offence or warrant prosecution. Any intentional act related to the cause of action that violates the standards of fairness and justice is sufficient to prohibit the award of equitable relief. The Giants accepted from Flowers what it called a binding contract, but agreed to present to the public that there was no contract to deceive others who had a substantial interest in the case. If there had been a simple performance of the contract, followed by its submission to the Commissioner, none of these legal problems would have existed. The Giants created the situation through their sneaky behavior and therefore had no right to be exonerated by a fair court. The court refused to actually perform the contract. In an appropriate case, a new procedure for insufficient damage will be granted.
However, there are some exceptions to this rule. If the plans of the building are clearly defined, or if there is sufficient partial execution so that control of the rest is not difficult, the court may grant a certain service for completion.
