People who work daily with different documents know very well how much efficiency depends on how convenient it is to access editing instruments. When you Collateral Agreement papers must be saved in a different format or incorporate complex elements, it might be challenging to handle them using conventional text editors. A simple error in formatting might ruin the time you dedicated to edit logo in Collateral Agreement, and such a basic job shouldn’t feel hard.
When you find a multitool like DocHub, this kind of concerns will never appear in your projects. This robust web-based editing platform will help you easily handle documents saved in Collateral Agreement. It is simple to create, edit, share and convert your files wherever you are. All you need to use our interface is a stable internet access and a DocHub account. You can create an account within minutes. Here is how straightforward the process can be.
With a well-developed editing platform, you will spend minimal time figuring out how it works. Start being productive the minute you open our editor with a DocHub account. We will ensure your go-to editing instruments are always available whenever you need them.
This week, Ive been looking at the case of Coleman v Mundell, which was handed down at the end of last month. The case was a dispute about an oral contract. The claimant, Mr C sought specific performance of the contract, which is an order compelling a party to comply with their contractual obligations. It is an equitable remedy and so it is only available at the courts discretion. The facts of this case may be summarised as follows. Mr C, the claimant, had a company which was suffering financial difficulties and he wanted to secure a cash injection into his business. He owned shares in a Spanish entity. The defendant Mr M was Mr Cs friend and also a businessman. Mr C and Mr M had a conversation on the 30th of September 2016. Mr C and Mr M each recalled that conversation differently. At trial, Mr C said that Mr M agreed to make an interest-free loan of 250,000 and that the loan would be secured on Mr Cs shares. Mr M recalled that Mr C had said that
