A homeowner hired a contractor to build a custom deck, and the contract specified that the deck must be made from cedar wood. The contractor built the deck on time but used a different type of lumber that is less durable and less valuable than cedar. The homeowner refused to pay the contracting fee. Was the contractor's failure to use cedar wood likely a material breach of the contract?
Yes, because substituting a less durable and less valuable material reduces the homeowner's expected benefits under the contract.
Yes, because altering agreed-upon terms without consent constitutes a material breach.
No, because the deck was completed on time and fulfills its functional purpose despite the substitution.
No, because offering compensation for the substitution resolves the issue outside of the contract's material terms.
A material breach occurs when a party's failure to perform substantially affects the agreement's purpose or deprives the other party of a critical benefit they reasonably expected. In this case, the requirement to use cedar wood was likely a fundamental term, as it ensures durability and value. The substitution of an inferior material would likely impair the contract's purpose for the homeowner. Completing the deck on time or offering compensation does not excuse a breach when an essential term is altered. Furthermore, while not all deviations from a contract result in material breaches, altering critical terms without consent undermines a party's trust and the core of the agreement.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What constitutes a material breach in a contract?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
How do courts determine if a substitution of materials constitutes a breach?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What are the remedies available for a material breach of contract?