FavoriteLoadingSave to briefcase | Rating: | By (2012)

  • PrintEmail Link
  • Viewed 3,643 times | Saved to 469 briefcases
NAV Canada v. Greater Fredericton Airport Authority Inc, 2008 NBCA 28


D had exclusive right to provide aviation equipment to P. Governed by ASF agreement. P needed new runway. D said needed new system. P said they weren’t bound to pay, but would do it under protest to get the runway working. P refused to pay


Did the parties enter into an enforceable agreement when the P promised to pay D?


Post-contractual modification, unsupported by consideration, may be enforceable so long as it is established that the variation was not procured under economic duress (variation w/o consideration is enforceable so long as no economic duress – modification of Stilk)


Consideration must move from promisee (N) – promisee must suffer a detriment in return for the promise of the promisor (G).


D had to pay, because there was economic duress

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to participate.

This document is a general discussion of certain legal and related issues and must not be relied upon as legal advice. This document may not have been written or reviewed by a legal practitioner. For more information, please see the website Terms of Service.