You Be the Judge Case Study“Property: Subtracting the Addition

Property: Subtracting the Addition
Name
Course
Affiliation
Date
Property: Subtracting the Addition
The plaintiff deviated from the agreement made with the defendant at the beginning of the contract. The defendant had not implemented the use of zoning laws in the marketing of the home on sale. However, the broker marketing the property did not follow the contract rules when he decided to use the laws to sell the property quickly and get the desired part of the commission in a short period. The plaintiff could be judged to a person that can do the worst to achieve something based on their interest and not the requirements of the issued case. However, such actions are bound to affect the other people around the issue negatively and individuals should always avoid them. The defendant is right to issue concerns on the right over the misused property (Kendall & Tulip, 2018). The plaintiff should face judgment for exceeding the requirements of the issued deal on the property.
First, the defendant lost the value of his property through the involvement of zoning laws in the selling marketing process. Although the plaintiff might have taken a shorter time to sell the property, the home acquired a high disintegration of value by the implementation of the laws (Standard Group PLC, 2019). The defendant lays claims that following the agreed procedure would have maintained the value of the property. The plaintiff could have also consulted the owner of the property before using the zoning laws on the house. Selling property quickly can't match the number of losses incurred on the value of the property (Kendall & Tulip, 2018). The defendant has all the rights to complain about the marketing strategy used by the plaintiff. The latter should have followed the agreed terms through the entire process of marketing the property, despite the amount of time taken before getting a ready buyer.
The plaintiff broke the laws of a contract. All the laws and regulations binding a certain contract should be abided to without interference until completion of the project in action. Both parties in an agreement should either follow the rules or get ready to face the repercussions of breaking any of the rules. According to the defendant, the plaintiff went out of the agreement by following zoning rules that were not part of the agreed contract. In this case, the plaintiff gave an addition of what is best according to their interest and not according to the contract. Although the action can't be termed as breach of contract because the property was still so...