Hey guys,

What's the differnce difference between repudiation and breach, and can anyone think of any examples or case studies to help outline this?

Thank you

A repudiation occurs generally before performance of a contract begins, and has different remedies available (to the aggrieved/non-repudiating party) depending upon whether the contract involves the sale of goods (where the UCC governs) and/or services or property (where common law governs).

For example, under the UCC, if one party (A) has good reason to believe that the other (B) will not be able to perform (A has good reason to believe that B will not deliver the widgets to A as they previously agreed to in a contract), A may demand adequate assurances of performance by B, and A may either (1) suspend his/her own performance, or (2) demand a formal statement of repudiation from B. Under the rule of anticipatory repudiation, If B does repudiate the contract formally, A may then treat B's repudiation as a breach of their contract and bring suit against B immediately (A does not need to wait until the agreed time for performance from B was due).

When a party fails to fulfill their obligation under the contract, there has been a breach. A breach of contract may excuse the other party's duty to perform. This depends upon whether the breach classifies as a minor breach or a material breach. For example, if Builder (B) contracts with Homeowner (H) to replace H's fence. If B replaces all but 10% of H's fence, the breach is minor and thus H is not excused from performing (H must pay B). However, if B only completes 40% of the fence, the breach is material, and H is excused from performing. The issue is the materiality of the breach, not the breach itself, which is a question of fact for the court (judge/jury) unless material/minor breaches are defined in the contract.
(Now, of course, B may then sue H under quasi-contract for the value that B conferred on H, and H may hire C to complete the job, etc. but that is a separate remedies analysis.) Simply stated: A minor breach does not excuse the other party's nonperformance. A material breach does.

I hope this satisfies your question.

Thanks sherri!

Much appricated and yes it does, however I am in australia and am looking for Australian law , I proberly should have specifed that :)

Cheers anyway mate