(1) The parties if they so intend can conclude a contract for sale even though the price is not settled. In such a case the price is a reasonable price at the time for delivery if:
(a) Nothing is said as to price; or
(b) The price is left to be agreed by the parties and they fail to agree; or
(c) The price is to be fixed in terms of some agreed market or other standard as set or recorded by a third person or agency and it is not so set or recorded.
(2) A price to be fixed by the seller or by the buyer means a price for him to fix in good faith.
(3) When a price left to be fixed otherwise than by agreement of the parties fails to be fixed through fault of one party, the other may at his option treat the contract as cancelled or himself fix a reasonable price.
(4) Where, however, the parties intend not to be bound unless the price be fixed or agreed and it is not fixed or agreed there is no contract. In such a case the buyer must return any goods already received or if unable so to do must pay their reasonable value at the time of delivery, and the seller must return any portion of the price paid on account.
(Acts 1965, No. 549, p. 811.)
Notes of Decisions
Intergraph Corp. v. Intel Corp., 195 F.3d 1346 (Fed. Cir. 1999).
“Ala.Code §§ 7-2-305 to 310. There is no gap-filling exercise that can reasonably include all of the terms of the district court’s injunction order.”
Fausak's Tire Ctr., Inc. v. Blanchard, 959 So. 2d 1132 (Ala. Civ. App. 2006).
· cites it 2× “Code 1975, modifies that common-law rule to make contracts for the sale of goods enforceable despite the lack of an agreement regarding price if the parties "so intend; " however, § 7-2-305(4) provides that "[w]here . . . the parties intend not to be bound unless the price be…”
Brenda Darlene, Inc. v. Bon Secour Fisheries, Inc., 101 So. 3d 1242 (Ala. Civ. App. 2012).
· cites it 2× “” Ala.Code 1975, § 7-2-305(4). Furthermore, we cannot agree with the shrimp-boat companies that the exception contained in § 7-2-201(3)(b) operates in this instance.”
Intergraph Corp. v. Intel Corp., 3 F. Supp. 2d 1255 (N.D. Ala. 1998).
“Accordingly, Alabama law applies to the interpretation of this Agreement. In any event, California has adopted verbatim the same provisions of the Alabama Uniform Commercial Code discussed herein.”
— Ala. Code § 7-2-305(1) — 1 case
Fausak's Tire Ctr., Inc. v. Blanchard, 959 So. 2d 1132 (Ala. Civ. App. 2006).
“Code 1975, modifies that common-law rule to make contracts for the sale of goods enforceable despite the lack of an agreement regarding price if the parties "so intend; " however, § 7-2-305(4) provides that "[w]here . . . the parties intend not to be bound unless the price be…”
— Ala. Code § 7-2-305(4) — 2 cases
Fausak's Tire Ctr., Inc. v. Blanchard, 959 So. 2d 1132 (Ala. Civ. App. 2006).
“Code 1975, modifies that common-law rule to make contracts for the sale of goods enforceable despite the lack of an agreement regarding price if the parties "so intend; " however, § 7-2-305(4) provides that "[w]here . . . the parties intend not to be bound unless the price be…”
Brenda Darlene, Inc. v. Bon Secour Fisheries, Inc., 101 So. 3d 1242 (Ala. Civ. App. 2012).
“” Ala.Code 1975, § 7-2-305(4). Furthermore, we cannot agree with the shrimp-boat companies that the exception contained in § 7-2-201(3)(b) operates in this instance.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.