Violation of "good faith" in contracts????

[MePutPuckInNet]

Well,,,I've been thinking about this for a while, and I just don't get it..... The NHL has stated, in the press that they established a "war chest" of approx. $300 million. Right? So what I can't comprehend about that is.....how could they continue to sign players to contracts after? Wouldn't the establishment of a "war chest" be an indicator that they were PLANNING on locking out the players? And if that's the case....then wouldn't any players signed contracts thereafter be in violation of the legal "good faith" principal????

"Bad faith refers to dishonesty or fraud in a transaction, such as entering into an agreement with no intention of ever living up to its terms..."
definition

Click to read more...

 

[JeSuisReine]

I don't think it would be a violation of good faith because the owners aren't signing the contracts with no intention of honoring them. If there were a season, they would honor them, and when the next season begins, they will honor the contracts. Thus its good faith.

[at least that is what I think...I don't know if business law actually supports that or not]

 

[MePutPuckInNet]

well...here's the definition of Bad Faith: 1) n. intentional dishonest act by not fulfilling legal or contractual obligations, misleading another, entering into an agreement without the intention or means to fulfill it, or violating basic standards of honesty in dealing with others. Most states recognize what is called "implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing" which is breached by acts of bad faith, for which a lawsuit may be brought (filed) for the breach (just as one might sue for breach of contract). The question of bad faith may be raised as a defense to a suit on a contract. 2) adj. when there is bad faith then a transaction is called a "bad faith" contract or "bad faith" offer. source

So...uh....what I'm saying is....if they knew damn well they didn't have the money to fulfill the contracts with the players....or the means .... and in fact, were so sure of this that they knew long ago...long enough to even establish a fund for the owner's survival during a lockout.....I mean...i dunno.....something sure smells about that.....and not like Roses, either

 

[me2]

So...uh....what I'm saying is....if they knew damn well they didn't have the money to fulfill the contracts with the players....or the means .... and in fact, were so sure of this that they knew long ago...long enough to even establish a fund for the owner's survival during a lockout.....I mean...i dunno.....something sure smells about that.....and not like Roses, either

They do have the money.
They do have the intention to pay them.

All they need is the players to sign the new CBA since the old one just expired.

 

[ladybugblue]

"War chest"

I could be wrong but from what I was told the "war chest" is not necessarily full of money. This isn't necessarily money that is current in their bank accounts but money that they have been pre-approved for in terms of loans to keep operations going in case of a lock out. I think those are two completed different things. If I am pre-approved for say $50,000 loan does not mean I have $50,000 to spend...well to some folks it might be...I remember John Davidson talking about in oh HNIC near the end of the season or playoffs and repeated by some other reporters. Again I could be wrong but this is what I remember hearing more than a couple of times.

 

[justapantherfan]

They have been building this war chest for some time. It was not just done the last year. according to the NHL they started saving for this in case things didn't go right. I forgot where I seen the article, NHL.com or sun-sentinel.com. Since the last CBA was extended (2 times) not redid, I think they new it would be coming down to this.

 

[thinkwild]

well...here's the definition of Bad Faith: 1) n. intentional dishonest act by not fulfilling legal or contractual obligations, misleading another, entering into an agreement without the intention or means to fulfill it, or violating basic standards of honesty in dealing with others. Most states recognize what is called "implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing" which is breached by acts of bad faith, for which a lawsuit may be brought (filed) for the breach (just as one might sue for breach of contract). The question of bad faith may be raised as a defense to a suit on a contract. 2) adj. when there is bad faith then a transaction is called a "bad faith" contract or "bad faith" offer. source

So...uh....what I'm saying is....if they knew damn well they didn't have the money to fulfill the contracts with the players....or the means .... and in fact, were so sure of this that they knew long ago...long enough to even establish a fund for the owner's survival during a lockout.....I mean...i dunno.....something sure smells about that.....and not like Roses, either

I like it. If just as a nuisance suit, for the PR value alone.