Ann: Binding Amendment to Supply Agreement with ONIX Brazil, page-32

I know you're a real estate/property agent outside of your anonymous HotCopper profile, hence your use of a 'property contract' as a comparison to a commercial business contract.

Unlike your standard property contract, which allows for a Vendor (e.g.) to withhold the deposit if the Purchaser were to default and/or charge penalty interest, commercial contracts do not have such a security such as deposit - other than registering your interest in the company and its assets on the PPSR (Australia) or outlining one party's right in the case of a default and then suing in the relevant court if mediation falls through.

If one party breaches the Agreement, contract law aims to remedy the affected party for any loss or damage suffered from the breach. The outcome is determined on a case by case basis and will reflect the terms of the contract - no it is not common for commercial parties to include the total damages one will be liable for in their Agreement if a breach were to occur.

Your post suggests that MGC and ONIX have not included such strong protections in their Agreement, how have you arrived at your conclusion without actually have seen the Agreement in its entirety along with the termination clause? I'm interested as to why you suspect this agreement is nothing more than a potential 'hand shake' agreement?

In response to your last paragraph, what is the disincentive you ask? What can MGC or ONIX do if either were to breach the agreement, good question. As stated above, a standard commercial contract (and contract law in general) allows for the party to sue for damages and non-performance of the contract. Additionally, they will seek legal costs to be paid by the breaching party. That in itself is 'disincentive' enough.

The announcement specifies the agreed 'minimum orders'. Hence, if ONIX were not to honour their side of the agreement, the minimum order (plus any further damages) is what MGC would seek if ONIX were to breach the Agreement.

I think you have your property law world mixed up with commercial business agreements. I hope the above has made it a little clearer for you.