Unpacking Contract Law: Recent Episodes
Timothy Dodsworth, Maggie Hemsworth & Severine Saintier
Welcome to unpacking contract law. The UK based contract law podcast delivering unsolicited opinions on new and old contract law cases. The purpose of these podcasts is to provide you with an insight into our thoughts, ideas and ideologies around all things contract law. It also provides us with an outlet for all our opinions - you listen at your own peril! Each podcast will feature a new contract law case with a discussion from three contract law enthusiasts: Maggie Hemsworth, Severine Saintier and Tim Dodsworth.
Force Majeure #Reasonable Endeavours #Interpretation
Maggie claims to be orthodox. Severine is persistent and Tim claims to be using reasonable endeavours. Was it all predictable or is there some force majeure at work?
Check out our sponsor: https://www.reading.ac.uk/ready-to-study/study/subject-area/law-ug/mlaw
Permalink
liquidated damages #penalty clauses #primary/secondary obligations
Three semantic magicians turn liquidated damages into penalties, primary obligations into secondary and back again – or not!
Check out our new sponsor: https://www.reading.ac.uk/ready-to-study/study/subject-area/law-ug/mlaw
Permalink
Contra Proferentem #Exclusion Clause #Interpretation
It’s all bad luck, chums. Severine marks them all down.
Check out our sponsor: ncl.ac.uk
Permalink
Remoteness #Interpretation #Indirect Loss
Where's Tim? Is it all contra proferentem?
Check out our sponsor: ncl.ac.uk
Damages #Remoteness #Comparative Law
Who cares if the poms have got it wrong? Tim could be a tour guide round Gloucester docks, Severine would support the business – could Maggie foresee this?
Check out our sponsor: ncl.ac.uk
exclusion clauses #unfair terms #incorporation
Tim is speechless. Severine is handed her favourite on a platter and apparently Maggie was younger in 1977. Are there more unfair terms than expected?
Check out our sponsor: ncl.ac.uk
We're all in the same room! What could possible go wrong when we have to interpret mathematical questions?
Listen to us discuss this case with our american colleagues from the 'Clauses and Controversies' Podcast - https://open.spotify.com/show/2knPFRNkU9iuPSiwtaqIb9?si=CtU0kCx-SUWACdlQ8j9RRw
Check out our sponsor: ncl.ac.uk
Tim threatens to burn it all down. Maggie is not fussy and yet Séverine does not pick up on it. Do they have capacity for more discussions? Check out our sponsor: ncl.ac.uk/law/
Unpacking Barton v Morris
Implied Terms #Unjust Enrichment #Interpretation
Severine finds every trace of good faith. Maggie finds it all beguiling and Tim just dumps unjust enrichment. Is it implied that they can’t agree?
Check out our sponsor: ncl.ac.uk/law/
Incorporation #Misrepresentation #Penalties
Tim wishes it was 1934. Maggie claims we have faces for radio but Severine remains unconvinced. Can this all be incorporated into one podcast?
Check out our sponsor: ncl.ac.uk/law/
Illegality #Morality #Policy
It's the 2-year anniversary of Unpacking Contract Law! Maggie takes her portable palm tree with her. Tim lets policies compete. Severine allows some agreement - isn't that illegal?
Check out our sponsor: ncl.ac.uk/law/
Rectification #Common Mistake #Common Intention
Severine discovers a pedagogical tool kit. Maggie admits to being contrary and Tim gets into principles whilst juggling bystanders and promisees. Can they rectify things?
Interpretation #Construction #Mistake #Rectification
Check out our sponsor: ncl.ac.uk/law/
Good Faith #Implied Terms
For just a brief moment, Severine believes that there's agreement but Maggie explains why she's all wrong. Tim's not sure why he even attended. Is this the final episode of the podcast? We finally discuss good faith!
Check out our sponsor: ncl.ac.uk/law/
In this episode, Tim thinks Maggie is going to be a difficult customer for his straw business. Severine will finish her point at all cost. Yet we all agree that the court got it wrong: it is a 'battle of terms' rather than a 'battle of forms'.
It’s our 10th episode! Severine likes Victorian decisions and Tim is a quiet fan. However, it’s all about duress when Maggie threatens to quit.
Tim attempts to blame it all on the (non-existent) script. Maggie fears physical violence and Severine opens Pandora’s box. It has to be a case about the interpretation of a liquidated damages clause.
This week we’re discussing pets in contract law. Tim provides a lecture on dog health. Severine places the cat among the mice and Maggie explains why she’s working with two donkeys.
We struggle to find who was actually in control (in the case). Severine agrees with Tim but only because she is thinking on her feet. Tim places Maggie on the Supreme Court and Maggie questions what we’ve all been doing for 800 years.
In this episode Severine finds the perfect title for our movie, Tim feels a little ill and Maggie coins the term ‘Hoffmannian’. We also unpack the case of Fulton Shipping Inc of Panama v Globalia Business Travel (2017).
In this episode we discuss the case of Joanne Properties Ltd v Moneything Capital Ltd. Are agreements now worthless? We find out why Lord Lewison can sleep well and Severine poses the existential question of who we are.
This episode covers the recent decision of Canary Wharf v EMA and the topic of frustration. We establish Maggie’s most hated words of 2020, Tim becomes Mr Mistake and Severine deletes a chapter in her textbook.
In this episode we discuss the implications of Wells v Devani. We find out what Maggie was up to in the 1980's and why Tim needs to get out more.
Can we find good faith anywhere? Is it easier to make a tough decision in the minority? Can all judges be right? For the answers to these questions and more you'll want to listen to this episode.