Crosswords1 min ago
Question for the contract lawyers?
7 Answers
If a tenant pays only one of two joint owners for the use of a property, instead of paying both owners equally as per the contract, who should the unpaid owner sue?
Should he sue the other owner, because the other owner accepted payment from the tenant and does not agree to share the money?
Or should he sue the tenant for not following the terms of the contract?
Should he sue the other owner, because the other owner accepted payment from the tenant and does not agree to share the money?
Or should he sue the tenant for not following the terms of the contract?
Answers
1 to 7 of 7
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by SoPerplexed. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
@scotman
Really? That seems unfair, as there is no suspicion that the tenant did it for any other reason that being misled by the bad co-owner. Surely the remedy would be for a judge to order the bad co-owner to pay the 'good' co-owner money that is rightfully that of the good co-owner?
Usually contract law is very fair and common-sense; I don't see it as fair to pursue someone who no longer has the money and paid it in good faith to someone who misled him. But if that's the law, that's the law, I suppose.
Really? That seems unfair, as there is no suspicion that the tenant did it for any other reason that being misled by the bad co-owner. Surely the remedy would be for a judge to order the bad co-owner to pay the 'good' co-owner money that is rightfully that of the good co-owner?
Usually contract law is very fair and common-sense; I don't see it as fair to pursue someone who no longer has the money and paid it in good faith to someone who misled him. But if that's the law, that's the law, I suppose.
1 to 7 of 7
