Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Contract law rules
Introduction: The case of Bernard, Charleen & Damien v. Alan depicts the obligations of an offeror and offeree, if the contract is permitted and if the sale of goods were delivered as per the terms stated in the initial offer or contract. There were no intention to create legal relations as this case was held between the context of social and domestic agreements amongst friends and family. Bernard v. Alan Issue: Bernard had intended to buy the materials at a lower cost by presenting a counter offer of $150.00 which voids the initial offer Alan made. Even after Alan reverted on Bernard’s reply by rejecting the counter offer, he mailed out $200.00 cash to Alan which was received on November 5, 2015. Alan then provided the textbook on November …show more content…
However, the fact that acceptance to an offer has to be unqualified, unconditional and a rejected counter offer does not qualify to allow the reiterate the initial offer, shows that no legal obligations or contract was formed. Application: Bernard was rejected by Alan as a potential contracting party when the counter offer was presented. Thus, no contract obligations were imposed due to counter offer in place and Bernard’s intentions of initiating the original offer were not clearly stated as consideration of the offer, to create a contract, cannot be in the past. Although goods were received and payment made, no binding contract was imposed as Bernard received the items as per the promise, which was delivered under Undue Influence when he enforced payment onto Alan through mail. Further elaboration on undue influence showcases that by enforcing one’s power over another to obtain a benefit with exertion of improper pressure, vitiates the factor of moulding a
Maria had spoken with Eva over the phone concerning the correct total amount of $60,000 for rendering decorating services provided by Eva. Maria had sent a letter of the telephone conversation stating that Eva agreed to take $60,000 in full satisfaction obligation under the contract. Although Eva, changed her mind when depositing the check in the bank, she legally entered a mutual agreement over the telephone where it resulted in a unliquidated debt, payment is lower than actual.
Aldo shipped 10 refrigerators to Rafael pursuant to a sales contract under which title to the goods and risk of loss would pass to Rafael upon delivery to Fleet Railroad. The agreed price was $5,000. When the refrigerators were delivered to Rafael, he found they were damaged. An estimate for repairing them showed it would cost up to $1,000, and an expert opinion was to the effect that they were defective when shipped. Rafael put in a claim to Aldo, which Aldo rejected. Rafael then wrote to Aldo, “I don’t like to get into a despite of this nature. I am enclosing my check for $4,000 in full payment of the shipment.” Aldo did not reply, but he cashed the check and then sued Rafael for the $1,000 balance. May he recover? Explain.
The case of Graham v. Connor is about DeThorne Graham a diabetic that had an insulin reaction, and was pulled over and stopped by Officer Connor. The case is important because it has set the bar when it comes to other cases and the use of force and violation of Fourth Amendment rights.
However in correspondence of 21st March1952 the defendant instigated an alteration to the legal position of both parties, by offering to commence "without prejudice" the delivery instruction covering the balance of bullets, provided that the final delivery would not be made later than 30th September 1952. The plaintiff first repudiated this offer on the 3rd April, but by the 4th of June 1952, a second critical letter was sent out by the plaintiff's solicitor stating its acceptance of the defendant's offer. On 8th July 1952, the defendant propose that it will only purchase 800,000 bullets as opposed to the contracted amount of 1,800,000(less 200,000 which had been delivered and paid) as the contract on the 2nd August had not been accepted by the plaintiff which denied it. And no delivery instructions were given by the defendant on or before the 30th September.
Was Dred Scott a free man or a slave? The Dred Scott v. Sandford case is about a slave named Dred Scott from Missouri who sued for his freedom. His owner, John Emerson, had taken Scott along with him to Illinois which was one of the states that prohibited slavery. Scott’s owner later passed away after returning back to Missouri. After suits and counter suits the case eventually made it to the Supreme Court with a 7-2 decision. Chief Justice Taney spoke for the majority, when saying that Dred Scott could not sue because he was not a citizen, also that congress did not have the constitutional power to abolish slavery, and that the Missouri compromise was unconstitutional. The case is very important, because it had a lot
A Chinese toy manufacturer known as Fan Li approached Tegan to distribute its accessories for its Chinese made products in Europe in the May of 2007. According to the case, it was specified that Tegan’s traditional products had generally been £50 whereas Fan Li’s accessories were priced below £5. As their order’s size decreased, the growth of direct sales to consumers had increased their number of transactions. But it was a threat as Fan Li’s project provided a boost to the sales as tegan said agreed for Fan Li’s agreement. To get the appropriate outputs, Tegan’s account payables played a major role where tegan received discounts on most of its payables in prior payments as per the agreement.
Dred Scott, an African American man who was born into slavery, wanted what all slaves would have wanted, their freedom. They were mistreated, neglected, and treated not as humans, but as property. In 1852, Dred Scott sued his current owner, Sanford, about him, no longer being a slave, but a free man (Oyez 1). In Article four of the Constitution, it states that any slave, who set foot in a free land, makes them a free man. This controversy led to the ruling of the state courts and in the end, came to the final word of the Supreme Court. Is he a slave or a free man?
The Supreme court case Dredd Scott v Sandford brought up the question on whether slavery would be permitted in the new territories that had been threatened in the union . In addition to these questions, it also raised the question , on what the constitution had to say on this subject matter. Before this case was put into action, from the early 1780s the question of slavery being debated, over the years, many compromises were made to avoid the union being disbanded or in a form of distress. Dredd Scott was a slave of an army surgeon , named John Emerson. Dredd Scott had been taken from Missouri to Illinois during the 1840’s before returning to Missouri. during that time , the Missouri compromise had been formed which was a federal statute that regulated slavery in the western territories.
The scenario I have been given highlights the main complexity of contract law. It touches on issues such as unilateral contracts, revocation as well as advertisement. I will be advising Mick (claimant) answering: Whether Yummy chocolate is liable to give a year supply of chocolate as advertised?
Having evaluated the current state of English contract law, mainly made up of piecemeal solutions, it can be seen that despite being satisfactory and doing its job, there still remain gaps within the law of contract where unfairness is not dealt with. Moreover, due to the ad hoc nature of those piecemeal solutions, the latter have often produced inconsistent justice and have manifested cases of unfairness. Hence, “a relatively small number of respected Justices have endeavored to draw attention to the fact that the application of a general principle might be useful and even necessary in English law.”
CEO has set the target profit for each division and the divisional managers are allowed to do anything to attain the target profit for their divisions. Thus, a warehouse clerk from the Cellular Telephone Technologies Division ordered $350,000 of cellular telephone parts and the purchase department has accepted the goods. Moreover, since the goods were accepted, the supplier won't accept the return of those goods. Mr. Richart the vice president in charge of the Cellular Telephone Technologies Division asked the accounting department to delay recognition of the delivery until the bill is paid in
...‘Consideration: Practical benefit and the Emperor’s new clothes’ in Beatson and Friedmann (eds). Good Faith and Fault in Contract Law (Oxford University Press, 1995);
The legal issue of constitution of trusts is very important, judicial decisions over the years on cases where trusts were not properly constituted indicates that constitution of trusts could be quite complex and must be very cautiously done by a property owner as a simple factor could make his trust void. An express trust is completely constituted either by effectively transferring property to trustees or by effectively declaring a trust. In case of personal property, the declaration of the trust may be put in writing; however, equity will not perfect an imperfect gift. It is only when the trust is constituted that it is binding on the settlor. The long-standing idea that equity will not perfect an imperfect gift can be traced back to the 19th century cases of Ellison v Ellison and Milroy v Lord , and was further emphasized in the 20th century in the case of Re Fry .
U.C.C. - ARTICLE 2 - SALES (2002). (n.d.). Retrieved March 31, 2014, from Cornell University Law School: http://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/2/article2
The old common law had a doctrine of absolute contract under which contractual obligations were binding no matter what might occur (Paradine v Jane, 1647). In order to ease the hardship which this rule caused in cases where the contract could not be properly fulfilled through no fault of either party but due to occurrence of unforeseen events, the doctrine of frustration was developed.