logo

Business Law Case: Gamesa Energy USA v. Ten Penn Center

A contract is an agreement that is enforceable by a court of law or equity. Contracts are the basis of many daily activities and without enforceable contracts, commerce would collapse.

5 Pages1122 Words359 Views
   

Added on  2023-06-13

About This Document

This case study discusses the breach of contract between Gamesa Energy USA and Ten Penn Center. It covers the terms of the lease, subletting, and the violation of contract terms. The case is related to the law of contract and the court ruled in favor of the plaintiff.

Business Law Case: Gamesa Energy USA v. Ten Penn Center

A contract is an agreement that is enforceable by a court of law or equity. Contracts are the basis of many daily activities and without enforceable contracts, commerce would collapse.

   Added on 2023-06-13

ShareRelated Documents
Running Head: BUSINESS LAW
Business Law
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author Note
Business Law Case: Gamesa Energy USA v. Ten Penn Center_1
1BUSINESS LAW
Case: Gamesa Energy USA v. Ten Penn Center, 2016 Phila. Ct. Com. Pl. LEXIS 270- Breach of
contract.
In this case there has been a dispute between the plaintiff Gamesa Energy USA and the
defendant Ten Penn Center in relation to a lease which had been entered upon by them through
which the defendant had leased out a property to the plaintiff. The lease has the provisions that it
would come to an end on 1st September 2018. In addition under the lease the defendant had to
provide the plaintiff with a large “improvement allowance” which was to be utilized for building
out space according to the requirement of the plaintiff. Moreover the plaintiff had the right to
sublet the property under the lease which was subjected to the approval of the defendant.
However it had been stated in the lease that the lessor did not have the right to withhold, delay or
condition the approval in an unreasonable manner. The terms of the lease further make it clear
that the approval or denial of the subtenant has to be made in a written manner within 30 days of
the request of sub tenancy made by the tenant. The tenant after being on the property for several
years decided to sublet the property to Viridity Energy, Inc in part. The sublet agreement had
been approved by the defendant. The plaintiff used the remaining improvements allowance in
part to customize the property as per the needs of Viridity’s use. This only left the plaintiff with a
further fund of $391,000 in relation to the improvements allowance.
It had been informed by the plaintiff to the defendant after a year that they would be vacating the
property as their corporate office is to be moved at a different location. However it had been
notified by the plaintiff to the defendant they would continue to pay the rent of the property and
would be looking for a subtenant to be placed in the remaining part of the property. The
Business Law Case: Gamesa Energy USA v. Ten Penn Center_2

End of preview

Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.

Related Documents
Law in a Business Environment: Gamesa Energy USA v. Ten Penn Center Case Analysis
|6
|1082
|63