Agreement Opposed To Public Policy With Example

If an agreement reduces the limitation period, it is untested. That is because its purpose is to undo the provisions of the act. Example: a paid B, a civil servant, a certain amount of money that leads him to leave office, thus paving the way for A to be appointed in his place. The agreement was cancelled. It should be noted here that although an agreement to obtain marriage is not valid, the marriage will be a valid marriage. Since the monopoly is opposed to public policy, an agreement to create a monopoly is not concluded. Agreements made to use corrupt influence in obtaining government jobs, titles or honors are illegal and therefore unenforceable. Indeed, if such agreements are valid, corruption will increase and lead to inefficiency in the civil service. An agreement concluded for the purpose of defrauding creditors or tax authorities is not applicable because it is a matter of public policy. Example: A and B were rival traders in a place in Calcutta.

B agreed to pay A a sum of money if he closed his store there. A did, but B refused to pay him the money. The agreement is void and therefore it is not possible to recover money. `public policy` means a vague and unsatisfactory concept intended to create uncertainties and errors when applying to the decision on legal rights; it is capable of being understood in different directions; it can and will mean, in its ordinary sense, `political expediency` or what is best for the common good of the Community; And in this sense, there can be any type of opinion, depending on the education, habits, talents and dispositions of any person who must decide whether or not an act is contrary to public order. Allowing this decision as a ground for a court decision would create the greatest uncertainty and confusion. It is Decency and not of the lawyer, to discuss and determine to the legislator what is best for the common good, and to ensure it by correct decrees. It is the judge`s jurisdiction to explain only the law; Those that are written in the statutes; the unin writing or customary law of the decisions of our predecessors and existing courts, authors of texts with recognized authority and principles that must be clearly deduced from them by reasonable reason and by a just conclusion; We must not speculate on what he considers to be the best thing to the advantage of the Community. Some of these decisions may have been based on the prevailing and just views of the common good; for example, the illegality of alliances aimed at restricting marriage or trade. They are part of the recognized law and we are therefore bound by them, but we are not empowered to define as law everything we think for the common good and to prohibit everything we think differently. Two companies are planning to develop software that, in this scenario, violates privacy and concerns? There is no violation of privacy, given that the agreement was entered into voluntarily by the companies in the mutual interest and the interest of sharing their customers` information in themselves.

However, if customer information were leaked externally, it could result in violation u/s 72 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 for breach of confidentiality and privacy. . . .

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.