Having reviewed your document I'd say 3 is inconsistent with your accounting, as when your horses died you did not reduce in your own accounts and only reduced it in July after the meeting with the Claimant. I would say a judge would side that the agreement was a price for the space irrespective of the number of horses occupying it if this is pointed out by the claimants solicitor.
Also, you can admit 7 as you did leave without notice and there was no requirement for notice.
Other than that I'm on the same page as you, so bear with me while a do a little editing and we'll have a look at a first draft of the Defence for Rob to then cast his eye over.
Also, you can admit 7 as you did leave without notice and there was no requirement for notice.
Other than that I'm on the same page as you, so bear with me while a do a little editing and we'll have a look at a first draft of the Defence for Rob to then cast his eye over.
Comment