This may include penalty payments with a defined upper limit for recovery. 11. Governing Law - defines the location where litigation will occur in the event that a breach of contract suit must be pursued through the court. The Mooters interest: This contract component would have defined Britain or France as the court for litigating recourse and recovery. With regard to the Mooters situation, different jurisdictions and applicable laws apply if this suit progresses to court.

The following contract components could have been included in the Mooters' sales contract; however, given its likely low monetary exposure, these contract components are likely unnecessary.

Entire Agreement - defines that no party can amend any part of the contract, either orally or in written without all parties agreeing and signing written documentation which then will be appended to the contract.

Assignment of Rights - defines the claims the seller may make on the product sold after the transaction is completed. This is not generally applicable to goods but can be an important part of a services contract as it pertains the reuse of intellectual property on the part of the services provider.

Compliance with Law - defines the obligations of both parties to abide by applicable laws during the conduct of this transaction. It is a means for either party to void its obligations in the event of illegal activity on the part of the other party.

Termination - defines the means by which and the point at which either part may terminate the transaction. It will also define requirements for notice (documentation or oral) and timeframe (advance warning and "no cancel" date).

Severability...

Such clause is common in contracts to protect the parties in the event that a part of the contract cannot be performed due to causes which are outside the control of the parties and could not be avoided by exercise of due care" (p. 645). This term defines the respective responsibilities of each party if an extraordinary event occurs. This applies to those events in which the damage or loss of goods is caused by an event that cannot be reasonably anticipated as falling under the concept of proper "duty of care."
Conclusion

The research showed that the Mooters should sue if an insurance claim and recovery cannot be made. This finding concludes the assignment, as well as the evaluation of position and avenues available to the Munching Mooters for recourse and loss recovery. The company's management would be well advised to take the foregoing factors into account before proceeding with any recovery efforts.