Peter V Craig Summary

Introduction

I have been asked to advise Craig, a 17-year-old minor in relation to his contractual dispute with Peter. Peter advertised his restaurant ‘The feed bag’ in Dickson for $100,000 however represented his business as a more successful ‘The feed bag’ restaurant which was located in Civic. Despite having agreed to the deal Craig is yet to pay the monies and yet to take full possession and control of the business. Craig has requested my legal advice as to whether he has to proceed with the contract (that is, buy the restaurant) in these circumstances.
Key legal issues or questions
The key legal issues in Craig’s case appear to be:
(A) Does Craig and Peter have an enforceable contract? Was there an offer, acceptance, agreement, intention,

The inducement was actual, but didn’t need to be the only inducement to enter.
E. Remedies
a. Rescission- If a party ends a contract due to false representation the reccsiion applies from the time the contract was formed (ab initio), this means that the contract was never recognised by the law. If restitution isn’t available the innocent party will be bound to the contract. “If any of the following have occurred, the recision will not be possible:
1. The innocent party, after learning the falsity of the representation affirms the contract.
2. There has been undue delay between learning of the falsity of the representation and recision.
3. A third party has acquired the rights under the contract, and recession would prejudice those rights
4. Property has been transferred in the execution of the contract and recision would prejudice those rights.
b. Damages- Can be sought only if there is a breach in contract, according to common law. Under a commercial natured contract, if a breach of contract occurs, damages cannot be sought, with some exceptions. As seen in Dillon v Baltic Shipping Co (The Mikhail Lermontov) (1991) 22 NSWLR 1 if a persons enjoyment, relaxation or peace of mind are affected by distress they can seek

There is an agreement between the two parties and considering the parties have a commercial relationship the agreement can be said to have the intention to be binding in law. Although there was all of the above it is difficult to say there was in fact any consideration. Craig does accept the offer and agrees to the deal however it does not appear to be promisory in nature. Craig and Peter are not of the same capacity, Craig being a minor, which the common law states a minor may enter into two types of contracts: a contract for necessities and for the provision of beneficial sources. Either of these criteria appear to represent the purchase of a restaurant. Additionally, a solicitor may appoint a ‘minor certificate’ to allow a minor to enter into a contract such as a business, however, given the facts of the case we cannot ascertain whether it has been given and thus assume Craig was not granted the certificate. I would now advise my client that due to a lack of consideration between the parties, and the fact he lacked capacity there was never a contract to start with, however I would advise him that we must not be caught out in the dispute if the court rules there was a contract thus we must explore other areas to get him out of the