You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

February 21, 2014

Breach of Contract: Rescind or Perform?

Bangkok Post, Corporate Counsellor Column

When a contract is breached, or a party does not perform its obligations, this does not instantly affect the validity of a contract. It will continue to be valid and binding unless it is rescinded.

As a party to a contractual dispute, you have two choices: sue for performance according to the contract, or rescind the contract. In both cases, the aggrieved party possesses the right to claim damages for any loss incurred due to the other party’s breach of contract. Each option has its benefits, and deciding which one to choose will depend on whether the parties intend to continue doing business together.

In this article, we will explore the possibility of rescinding a contract without the existence of any specific contractual clause. It is possible to do so relying solely on the provisions of the Civil and Commercial Code, which sets out conditions under which a contracting party may rescind a contract.

A general right to rescind a contract arises when one party fails to perform its obligations under the contract. In the first instance, however, the party seeking to rescind must fix a reasonable period for performance and must notify the defaulting party to perform within that period. If such party still does not perform its obligations within that period, the other party may then rescind the contract.

Determining what is a reasonable period of time will require consideration of many factors, including the amount of any debt due, and the nature of any work to be performed by reference to the terms of the contract.

In cases where a party does not perform its obligation within a fixed period or at a fixed time specified in the contract, the other party may rescind the contract immediately, without notifying the defaulting party of a reasonable period for performance.

For example, let’s say a land developer is due to deliver a condominium unit in March 2014, and, as of today, the construction has not yet begun. In this case, the debtor surely cannot satisfy its obligation to deliver a unit in time, and so the sales contract can be immediately rescinded by the purchaser.

Such right to rescind immediately can be lost, however, if the party seeking to rescind has previously accepted late performance under the contract, or has behaved in a lenient manner toward the deadline to perform.

In such a case, the deadline will not be considered an essential element of the contract, and rescission cannot take place without notification of a reasonable period to perform.

There are many Supreme Court precedents in which plaintiffs have lost their advantage because they have previously accepted late payments, and therefore a time limit clause in their contract has lost its virtue and cannot be relied on in order to rescind the contract.

For people in the business world, being lenient and willing to negotiate can be a key to success, but it can also compromise the rights of the parties. Careful thought should therefore be given to any decision not to strictly enforce contractual deadlines for payment or performance.

Once a party has established the right to rescind a contract, either by notifying the defaulting party of a reasonable period to perform—which they have failed to meet—or by meeting the conditions described above, the contract may then be rescinded simply by making a declaration of intent to the other party.

Such a declaration is not required to be in any specific format and it can be made orally. But for purposes of certainty, sending a formal letter is always recommended.

When one party has exercised its right of rescission, each party is then bound to restore the other to its former condition. Interest will be added to the money to be repaid, and restitution made for services already rendered by either party by paying the appropriate value under the contract.

It is worth noting that any such amount to be paid will be separate from and in addition to the aggrieved party’s right to claim damages for losses caused by the other’s breach.

As stated above, once the party has exercised its right to rescind the contract, all the rights and obligations between the parties will end, and neither party can exercise its right to sue for compulsory performance.

Related Professionals

RELATED INSIGHTS​

July 24, 2024
Experts from Tilleke & Gibbins’ intellectual property team have contributed an updated Intellectual Property Transactions in Vietnam to Thomson Reuters Practical Law, a high-level comparative overview of  laws and regulations across multiple jurisdictions. Intellectual Property Transactions focuses on business-related aspects of intellectual property, such as the value of intellectual assets in M&A transactions, and the licensing of IP portfolios. Key topics covered in the chapter include: IP assignment: Basis and formalities for assignments of patents, utility models, trademarks, copyright, design rights, trade secrets, confidential information, and domain names. IP licensing: Scope and formalities for licensing patents, utility models, trademarks, copyright, design rights, and trade secrets. Research and development collaborations. IP audits. IP aspects of M&A: Due diligence, warranties/indemnities, and transfer of IPRs. Employee and consultant agreements. Practical Law, a legal reference resource from Thomson Reuters, publishes a range of guides for hundreds of jurisdictions and practice areas. The Intellectual Property Transactions Global Guide is a valuable resource for legal practitioners, covering numerous jurisdictions worldwide. To view the latest version of the Intellectual Property Transactions in Vietnam overview, please visit the Practical Law website and enroll in the free Practical Law trial to gain full access.
July 24, 2024
Intellectual property specialists from Tilleke & Gibbins in Thailand have contributed an updated Intellectual Property Transactions in Thailand overview for Thomson Reuters Practical Law, an online publication that provides comprehensive legal guides for jurisdictions worldwide. The Thailand overview was authored by Darani Vachanavuttivong, managing partner of Tilleke & Gibbins and managing director of the firm’s regional IP practice; Titikaan Ungbhakorn, senior associate and patent agent; and San Chaithiraphant, senior associate. The chapter delivers a high-level examination of critical aspects of IP law, including IP assignment and licensing, research and development collaborations, IP in mergers and acquisitions (M&A), securing loans with intellectual property rights, settlement agreements, employee-related IP issues, competition law, taxation, and non-tariff trade barriers. Key topics covered in the chapter include: IP assignment: Basis and formalities for assignments of patents, utility models, trademarks, copyright, design rights, trade secrets, confidential information, and domain names. IP licensing: Scope and formalities for licensing patents, utility models, trademarks, copyright, design rights, and trade secrets. Research and development collaborations: Management of improvements, derivatives, and joint ownership of IP. IP aspects of M&A: Due diligence and critical considerations during mergers and acquisitions. Practical Law, a legal reference resource from Thomson Reuters, publishes a range of guides for hundreds of jurisdictions and practice areas. The Intellectual Property Transactions Global Guide is a valuable resource for legal practitioners, covering numerous jurisdictions worldwide. To view the latest version of the Intellectual Property Transactions in Thailand overview, please visit the Practical Law website and enroll in the free Practical Law trial to gain full access.
July 24, 2024
Acted as lead counsel for Nordic Transport Group A/S (NTG), an international freight forwarding company based in Denmark, in its acquisition of a stake in Asia-based Freightzen Logistics Ltd., Inc. through a newly established subsidiary, NTG APAC Holding Pte. Ltd.
July 23, 2024
In the Who’s Who Legal (WWL) Southeast Asia guide for 2024, a total of 12 Tilleke & Gibbins lawyers have been distinguished as market leaders in various legal practice areas. The firm’s 12 recognized lawyers, singled out for their commitment to delivering exceptional legal services to Tilleke & Gibbins’ clients, are grouped into seven practice areas: Asset Recovery: Thawat Damsa-ard Data: Alan Adcock, Athistha (Nop) Chitranukroh Franchise: Alan Adcock, Jay Cohen Intellectual Property: Alan Adcock (Patents, Trademarks), Darani Vachanavuttivong (Patents, Trademarks), Kasama Sriwatanakul (Trademarks), Linh Thi Mai Nguyen (Trademarks), Somboon Earterasarun (Trademarks), Wongrat Ratanaprayul (Patents) Investigations: John Frangos and Thawat Damsa-ard Labor, Employment, and Benefits: Pimvimol (June) Vipamaneerut Life Sciences: Alan Adcock, Loc Xuan Le The annual WWL Southeast Asia rankings guide, published by the London-based group Law Business Research, aims to identify the foremost legal practitioners across a range of business law practice areas. The rankings are largely based on feedback and nominations received from other WWL-ranked and nominated attorneys around the world. These peer-driven recognitions highlight Tilleke & Gibbins’ dedication to maintaining the highest standards of legal service and helping clients achieve success. To read more about the WWL Southeast Asia guide, or to browse the full results, please visit the WWL website.