Washington Law Review
In requirements contract cases where buyer has significantly reduced—or no—requirements, courts employ inconsistent reasoning, resulting in legal uncertainty and economically inefficient exchanges. This Comment proposes a more predictable, efficient rule that would allow buyer to reduce its requirements after giving seller a business reason for the reduction, placing the risk of reduced requirements explicitly on seller.
Cheryl R. Guttenberg,
And Then There Were None: Requirements Contracts and the Buyer Who Does Not Buy,
64 Wash. L. Rev.
Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wlr/vol64/iss4/5