Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

right to cancel (a contract)

Read a random definition: prender de baron

A quick definition of right to cancel (a contract):

Right to Cancel (a Contract): The right to cancel a contract means that a person can choose not to do what they promised in a contract. Even though they might have to pay for any harm caused by breaking the contract, they usually won't be forced to do what they promised. This is because people should be free to make their own agreements. This is also called the cooling-off rule.

A more thorough explanation:

The right to cancel a contract is the ability for one party to refuse to follow through with a legally binding agreement. Even though the party may be responsible for any damages caused by their refusal, courts typically do not force parties to complete the contract. This is because the principle of freedom of contract is highly valued.

For example, if you sign a contract to purchase a car but later decide you no longer want the car, you may have the right to cancel the contract. However, you may still be responsible for any costs incurred by the seller as a result of your cancellation.

Another example could be if a company signs a contract with a vendor to provide services, but later decides they no longer need those services. The company may have the right to cancel the contract, but they may still be responsible for any costs or damages incurred by the vendor as a result of the cancellation.

These examples illustrate how the right to cancel a contract can be exercised, but also how it can have consequences for the party who cancels the agreement.

Right of way | Right to confront witness

Warning

Info

General

General chat about the legal profession.
main_chatroom
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
texaslawhopefully
22:30
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: That all sounds great. It sounds like it has fairly diverse cuisine for a smaller city
yeah there are so many good cuisines in ithaca
renard99
22:31
@lilypadfrog: that’s a pity I’da be liking them all
texaslawhopefully
22:31
Only food I’m going to miss for sure if I leave Texas is texmex
22:31
waspy hasnt had thai food in ithaca yet. ithaca thai is so good
^^^^ truuuuuu
22:32
there are two major thai places and they have very similar names bc a divorced husband and wife own them lol
22:32
personally i think taste of thai is better than taste of thai express but thats just me
i had pho tho and it was really good and huge portions
texaslawhopefully
22:32
Glad they have good Thai food, I love Thai food! Can’t wait to visit :)
22:33
when tex goes to ithaca i want to come
Dkk
22:34
Crying Tiger, best Thai dish.
damn im so hungry all i had today was a curry tonkatsu and buldak
and it was a lil baby noodle cup
vvv hungry
22:36
curry tonkatsu so yummeh
22:36
whats even open rn? pizza?
CTB is it i think
22:37
is collegetown pizza not open
22:37
i used to get a slice from there or wings over at like 1am after my shift at the restaurant
Dkk
22:48
Ross Ulbricht free. God Bless Trump. Huge win.
JeremyFragrance
22:54
agreed
texaslawhopefully
22:55
This is an interesting read: https://thedispatch.com/article/birthright-citizenship-trump-implications/
Dkk
23:01
I mean, idk how it's possible to end birth right citizenship without amending the constitution because to me the 14th amendment is pretty clear about it.
ross ulbricht tried to hire a hitman to kill 5 people
i am not that sympathetic to him
Dkk
23:04
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: That might have been an FBI agent. It was most likely him and he was most likely doing it to retrieve stolen funds that corrupt FBI agents stole, but yeah moral gray area but me personally, cool with hitmen. It's not like it is uncommon to hire hitmen. I don't think the action itself is necessarily wrong but the intent behind it can be.
Dkk
23:05
Like, Boeing whistblowers being killed by hitmen = wrong but a guy hiring hitmen to retrieve stolen funds = good to me.
texaslawhopefully
23:05
@Dkk: Yeah, for sure. My guess is it'll go to SCOTUS and it'll be 8-1 or 7-2, saying that EO was unconstitutional.
Dkk
23:06
Indeed. I need a count for how many exectuive orders he has signed and how many already have pending lawsuits.
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.