Here, there is only one obligation and the performance by one party to the contract will discharge the others. An example would be where a husband and wife enter a contract to buy a house jointly. Until the settlement price is paid, both of them are liable for the full price and the vendor can sue either or both of them for the full amount. Once the price is paid by one of them, the other no longer has an obligation to the vendor to pay. There is a presumption that a promise made by two or more persons is joint and therefore express words are required to make the liability 'joint and several'.
An examination of the intention of the parties and the language used in the contract will determine if the presumption can be rebutted. However, legislation does provide for particular promises to be joint, or even joint and several.
For example, in partnership law joint liability applies with regard to the liability of partners for partnership debts. Several liability arises when two or more persons make separate promises to another, whether under the same contract or different contracts.
The promises are cumulative and payment by one person does not discharge the other. An example would be a joint venture where the participants have agreed to pay a contractor for work to be performed for the joint venture and it is agreed that this obligation to pay is several. Each joint venture participant will be liable for its percentage of the fee to be paid and not for the total fee. The primary difference between these two rules is that with joint liability, the responsibility for an event or incident that goes wrong is spread equally among the members of a partnership.
In contrast, joint and several liability can shift among partners depending on ability to pay or on whom a jury or judge finds to be most responsible for the loss or damages that occurred.
Another difference is that with joint liability, each partner knows ahead of time what he or she will be responsible for if an outside party takes legal action and wins a monetary award. With joint and several liability, each partner has no way of knowing if he or she will be held solely responsible for paying off a monetary award. The reason that some states have adopted the joint and several liability rule is to better protect plaintiffs against defendants in a partnership who lack assets to pay off a jury award for monetary damages.
Sampson Quain is an experienced content writer with a wide range of expertise in small business, digital marketing, SEO marketing, SEM marketing, and social media outreach. Loans, mortgage, and other arrangement undertaken by a married couple with a bank or other financial institution are usually joint liabilities. In case one of the spouses dies, the surviving spouse will still be liable for the entire outstanding obligation.
Several liability is different from joint liability because it connotes a situation where multiple parties are held answerable or accountable for their proportionate obligation. A multiple car collision is a good illustration. There are several parties involved, but each party will only be responsible for a percentage of the damage depending on the degree of culpability or negligence they have in relation to the accident.
There is however, another type of liability, which must not be mistaken for the previous two types. This is the joint and several obligations, in which there are more than two parties and each of the parties can be held responsible for the same act or omission and be required to pay for the damages suffered. In such a case, the court may render judgment awarding sums for compensation and such obligation can be enforced against any one, several, or all of the guilty parties.
0コメント