Notice: Undefined property: WP_Error::$name in /home/sws275/spiderwebstudio.com/wp-content/themes/yin_and_yang/single.php on line 10
Standstill Agreement Legal Definition
Prior to their accession to the new territories, a status quo agreement was negotiated between India and Densern and the princely states of the British Indian Empire. It was a bilateral form of the agreement. A status quo agreement can be practically an agreement between the parties, in which both parties decide to suspend a specific issue for a specified date. This may be an agreement to defer payments to help a customer overcome strict market conditions. It can also be agreements to stop the production of a product. Two scenarios can lead to abuse of process in this context. The first, illustrated by Lewis v Ward Hadaway, was caused by a cash flow problem in the face of rising court costs. The defendants refused to enter into a status quo agreement, so the complainants had to cover the time to protect the time before receiving compensation to pay the court costs. The plaintiffs` lawyers paid the costs themselves. In order to reduce court costs, they place lower values on claim forms on claim forms that are lower than those the applicants wanted to claim. They then changed application forms and paid the higher expenses before they sent the application forms. This has been described as an abuse of process. Another type of status quo agreement occurs when two or more parties agree not to deal with other parties on a particular issue for a period of time.
For example, in merger or acquisition negotiations, the intended buyer and potential purchaser may agree not to seek acquisitions with other parties. The agreement strengthens the incentives of the parties to invest in negotiation and diligence, while preserving their own potential agreement. Courts have often asked applicants to initiate proceedings in these circumstances and then apply for a stay to follow the protocol. A stay works to suspend time, but, contrary to a status quo agreement, a court order is required. The Technology and Construction Works Site (CBT) guide recommends this course. As Coulson J commented in Russell v Stone, this is a much safer option than the imbroglio resulting from the self-inflicted complication of status quo agreements that do not work. A status quo agreement between a bank and a borrower operates in lines similar to those shown above. It suspends the contractual repayment plan of a stressed borrower and imposes certain conditions on the borrower. If the defendant is aware of an error, the court may deny him the benefit of his ruthless behaviour.