<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Contract Law Terms</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.adambaker.net/contract-law-terms/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.adambaker.net</link>
	<description>Case comments by Adam Baker.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Nov 2011 11:24:35 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Case Brief: Tercon Contractors v British Columbia</title>
		<link>http://www.adambaker.net/contract-law-terms/comment-page-1/#comment-95</link>
		<dc:creator>Case Brief: Tercon Contractors v British Columbia</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Feb 2011 17:30:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.adambaker.net/?page_id=20#comment-95</guid>
		<description>[...] case, similar the earlier case of M.J.B., considered the effect of an exclusion clause in the context of an acceptance of a non-compliant bid. The exclusion clause in this case was more [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] case, similar the earlier case of M.J.B., considered the effect of an exclusion clause in the context of an acceptance of a non-compliant bid. The exclusion clause in this case was more [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Put the bucket down</title>
		<link>http://www.adambaker.net/contract-law-terms/comment-page-1/#comment-10</link>
		<dc:creator>Put the bucket down</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2009 01:06:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.adambaker.net/?page_id=20#comment-10</guid>
		<description>[...] about the law applied in this case; the analysis is straightforward negligence and employer vicarious liability. Again, what the case illustrates very well is how a little sloppiness can result in a big [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] about the law applied in this case; the analysis is straightforward negligence and employer vicarious liability. Again, what the case illustrates very well is how a little sloppiness can result in a big [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Infinity Steel Inc. v. B &#38; C Steel Erectors Inc.</title>
		<link>http://www.adambaker.net/contract-law-terms/comment-page-1/#comment-9</link>
		<dc:creator>Infinity Steel Inc. v. B &#38; C Steel Erectors Inc.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2009 14:50:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.adambaker.net/?page_id=20#comment-9</guid>
		<description>[...] was no contract. B&amp;C was awarded its reasonable incurred costs for the work performed on a quantum meruit basis, plus [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] was no contract. B&amp;C was awarded its reasonable incurred costs for the work performed on a quantum meruit basis, plus [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Construction Law Terms and Definitions</title>
		<link>http://www.adambaker.net/contract-law-terms/comment-page-1/#comment-8</link>
		<dc:creator>Construction Law Terms and Definitions</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 02:03:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.adambaker.net/?page_id=20#comment-8</guid>
		<description>[...] Labrador Construction Law Case comments by Adam Baker.   Skip to content AboutInformation ResourcesContract Law TermsContact       &#171; Privilege Clauses and Dalcon [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Labrador Construction Law Case comments by Adam Baker.   Skip to content AboutInformation ResourcesContract Law TermsContact       &laquo; Privilege Clauses and Dalcon [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Privilege Clauses and Dalcon Enterprises</title>
		<link>http://www.adambaker.net/contract-law-terms/comment-page-1/#comment-7</link>
		<dc:creator>Privilege Clauses and Dalcon Enterprises</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 01:43:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.adambaker.net/?page_id=20#comment-7</guid>
		<description>[...] Inc., [2009] O.J. No. 2560 (Ont. S.C.J.) (&#8221;Dalcon&#8220;), and I indicated that the owner township had every right to exercise a contractual provision giving it &#8220;discretion&#8221; to [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Inc., [2009] O.J. No. 2560 (Ont. S.C.J.) (&#8221;Dalcon&#8220;), and I indicated that the owner township had every right to exercise a contractual provision giving it &#8220;discretion&#8221; to [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

