Does anyone know the legal differences of goods supplied on a contract later found to be unenforceable and non-executable and if so what's the significance if the borrower refused to pay any mloney on the agreement because goods supplied were faulty, potentially illegal and the vendor refused to repair, replace or cancel the agreement?
Would this mean the borrower is in a very seirous problem if they then refuse to pay and have in fact never paid anything on the agreement
Thanks
2007-01-18
01:34:40
·
2 answers
·
asked by
plastercast
1
in
Politics & Government
➔ Law & Ethics