8.12.12 If the restriction of the trade agreement is deemed inappropriate and therefore void, the “illegal” agreement may be separated from the rest of the contract, thus maintaining the validity of the contract. However, such separation is only possible if the terminated agreement does not constitute the whole or main service of the contract. If the terminated agreement constitutes all or the principal consideration for the contract, no severance pay can be paid and the entire contract is void. 8.8.5 Secondly, the unfulfilled obligation may depend on the prior occurrence of certain specified events: these may be external events or a consideration contractually agreed by the other contracting party. 8.8.6 Thirdly, the parties may contractually provide that non-performance resulting from certain events will be excused in order not to result in a breach, for example in the form of a clause on “force majeure”. At the very least, such a clause will keep all parties innocent of any liability for non-performance as a result of the declared force majeure event. More detailed clauses on force majeure may also provide for issues such as the reimbursement and reimbursement of instalments, reimbursement of costs incurred in preparing the performance of the contract, etc. These provisions are generally enforced by singapore law. Singapore`s contract law follows that of common law countries, where a contract is an agreement created by an “offer” and “acceptance” between two or more parties with the legal capacity to exchange “consideration” to create a legal obligation between them. Five key elements must be in place before a legally binding contract can be concluded. 8.10.3 In general, a misrepresentation must also be material in that it relates to a matter that would affect a reasonable person`s decision whether or not to enter into the contract.

If a representation is ambiguous and can be interpreted in two (or more) ways, one of which is true and the other false, it is not a false statement unless the representative intended it to be understood in the sense that is false. 8.2.8 An incomplete agreement may also not constitute an enforceable contract. Agreements concluded “contractually” may be considered incomplete if, as is apparent from the facts, the intention of the parties should be legally bound only with the execution of a formal document or until another agreement is concluded. 8.8.8 In the absence of a legal excuse, a breach of contract has two main effects. 8.5.2 Once the terms of a contract have been established, the court will apply an objective examination in the interpretation or interpretation of the meaning of those terms. What is important in this provision, therefore, is not the meaning that one of the parties attaches to the words used, but the way in which a reasonable person would understand those terms. In this context, the courts of Singapore have always stressed the importance of the factual matrix in which the contract was concluded, as this would help determine how a reasonable man would have understood the language of the document. The parties must have intended to establish legal relations. If there was no mutual intention to create a legally binding agreement, there could be no contract.

8.8.7 Fourth, if the reason for the non-performance lies in events beyond the control of the parties and neither party could reasonably have foreseen, the contract will be described as “frustrated”. In such cases, there are legal provisions that specify the extent to which advances made before the frustrating event occurred can be reimbursed and the work done in preparation for the performance of the contract before the frustrating event can be reimbursed – see Frustrated Contracts Act (Cap 115, 1985 Rev Ed) s 2(2) or s 2(4). Section 2(3) of the Frustrated Contracts Act also empowers the courts of Singapore to assess any non-monetary benefit that might have been granted by one party prior to another party`s frustrating event and to require the recipient of those benefits to pay for that value received. The courts may find that the parties have entered into a binding contract, although certain conditions have yet to be agreed. However, if the terms are missing, they must be able to be implied by the court – the court must be able to fill in the gaps. In some cases, the court may be able to establish a standard of adequacy, either on the basis of the common law or on the basis of the law. 8.9.9 First of all, it should be noted that unilateral mistaken identity generally concerns cases where the consent of a party to an agreement is obtained by deception. .