What Is Legal Accord For - Essay Example

? Contract Law: Scenario Analysis According to Gordley, a contract is a legal accord between two or more parties where each of the parties commits to discharge a specific duty or duties for the other party according the agreement.1 He further states the agreement comes into existence when one party issue a tender and anybody willing to be bound by the conditions stated in the contract to its can agree to its terms long as they meet its requirements. Slawson further argues that although both parties agree to be bound in a contract out of their free will, there are conditions that they are supposed to observe in order to ensure that they discharge their duties effectively.2 According to Glachant, the agreement may either be in black and white or just oral.3 Therefore, both parties are bound by conditions of the agreement and they are supposed to observe every bit of it in order to avoid the repercussions of neglecting those terms. According to Marshall, the terms of the agreement may either be stated expressly where the parties to the contract have included those terms in the agreement, or they may by implied in case the parties have not stated them in their agreement, but they are provided by the general law.4 Enforcing the terms of the contract ensures both parties gain from the execution of the agreement sated in the contract, and that no person or party to the contract takes advantage of the other by failing to discharge their obligations after the other parties have done their part.5 Therefore, while the contract indicates the benefits each party to the contract will obtain once it is completed, it also states the consequences for failing to meet the terms and conditions as stated in the agreement. It apparent therefore, circumstances of a contract determine the accountability each party owes the other. According to Paul, during the making of agreement it takes parties willingness to establish a lawful relationship with an aim of carrying out a legal activity.6 One party begins by placing an offer while the other agrees to be bound by its conditions. In our discussion scenario, Mr. Jack and Mr. Donald established an agreement whereby, Mr. Jack requested Mr. Donald to build him a patio for his two parties that were to be held on 15th and 17th of May of the same year respectively. Mr. Jack had informed Mr. Donald who was the contractor of his intention long before the occasion. It is apparent that Mr. Jack did not want any inconvenience that would be caused by delays in completion of the work. After explaining the terms of the contract and his concern about completion time of the contract, Mr. Donald signed the agreement hence he accepted to be bound by the terms envisaged in it. This was in accordance to the prerequisite of a lawful agreement in which both parties are required to declare to the other party of their intention for engaging in an agreement.7 According to Marshall, a legal agreement should have commencement date and concluding date.8 According to the agreement signed by the parties, the work was supposed to begin on fifteenth of March until 15th of April the same year. Although Mr. Jack was worried that the work would not be completed in one month due to possibility for interferences from of the weather, Mr. Donald assured him that he would take care of that by involving more workers to shorten the period required for completing the work. Since the agreement between these parties is that service and materials, Mr. Jack had no option, but to rely on the expertise of the contractor.9 Therefore, Mr. Jack had fulfilled a very crucial part of his obligation by informing the other party of his plan and expectations. A lawful agreement also requires each party to provide consideration as a commitment for their obligations of the executing the contract requirement.10 In this case, Mr. Jack had given ?5000 as stipulated in the agreement signed by the parties. This implied that Mr. Jack had shown his commitment to the contract as the law requires. On the other hand, Mr. Donald gave assurance to Mr. Jack that his work would be completed in time and that there was no inconveniences to be anticipated since he had organized for workers to execute their duties. Therefore, these assurances given by Mr. Donald to Mr. Jack represent consideration on the side of Mr. Donald to discharge his obligations. Mr. Jack explained to the contractor the nature of slab he relied. According the contract of sale of goods, if the client request for a specific product by description the law assumes that client relied on the information and expertise of the seller if it was in the area of his or her expertise, the seller is liable in case he or she fails to deliver products of client’s expectations.11 My. Jack had described the type of patio he wanted to resemble that of his sister. It was therefore the duty of the contactor to build a patio similar to that specified though this was not included in the agreement. According to the ruling in the case of Sotiros Shipping Inc -v- Sameiet: The Solholt [1981] 2 Lloyd's Rep 574, the plaintiff cannot be compensated if they could do something to mitigate the loss but failed to do it.12 If one of the parties fails to discharge their duties wholly or to some extent, the court may demand for compensation to be given to the other party by the defaulting party. The aim of paying for the damages is to ensure the party who has been failed if brought to the same position he would have been had all the requirements of the contract been completed as stated.13 However, the court will have to consider both circumstances that led to the failure in order to ensure the failure by one party did not prevent the other party from executing his or her obligations.14 If in case the court establishes that the plaintiff was in a capacity to prevent the occurrence of loss due to failure by the other party and did not do anything to avert that loss, then the plaintiff will also be liable for negligence hence cannot claim for payment of damages.15 However, it is upon the court to determine whether the action taken by Mr. Jack was for the benefit of both parties and whether it was appropriate and fair based on the prevailing situation. In the case of Mr. Jack and Mr. Donald, it is clear that Mr. Jack did all his best to mitigate the perceived loss due to failure by Mr. Donald to construct patio. He arranged for a hall to host his guests although at a greater expenses that the budgeted amount. However, this was the only option that was at his disposal after the contractor failed to established patio as agreed in the contract. Therefore, Mr. Donald was liable for compensating Mr. Jack the additional of 25000 plus the 5000 paid as deposit and any other additional cost the court may deem appropriate. The terms of the agreement stipulated that the amount paid was not to be refunded, but since the contractor did not take any action in time to ensure discharge of his duty, failure to refund the amount to Mr. Jack would make the contractor a beneficiary of his fault. The agreement between the two parties had included the date when the work was to begin and the time it was to be accomplished. However, due to effects of weather, Mr. Donald did not attempt his work within the agreed time. The contractor had also promised to bring in additional workers who would the work completed within the agreed time. However, due to unfriendly weather conditions, the workers decided to look for other jobs elsewhere hence Mr. Donald could not be able to secure additional workers as promised. This made Mr. Jack to prevent from accessing the construction site. Contract is only effective within a specified duration. In this case, the contract between Mr. Jack and Mr. Donald was effective between 15th of March to 15th of April. One of the factors leading to culmination of the contract is lapse of time.16 Since the agreement stated that the work was supposed to be completed by 15th of April and that by that time the work had not started, Mr. Jack was not liable for barring the contractor from discharging his obligations. This is because the contract had expired and therefore no longer enforceable.17 Under such circumstance, the contractor cannot sue Mr. Jack for interference with the implementation of the agreement since the agreement was voidable.18 Since Mr. Jack wanted the patio for specific reason and that he wanted it within a specific time, it was alright that he prevented Mr. Donald to continue with the work since he would not complete the work within the time remaining and by starting the work late would result to additional cost since it would no longer be useful for the occasion it was intended for. During the time parties were signing the agreement, Mr. Jack specified the quality of materials the contractor was supposed to use during construction. Since the contract also included “Paving Association Terms and Conditions 2013” hence the parties were bound to those terms. It was for the same reason that Mr. Jack paid a deposit of 5000 at the time of signing the agreement as stipulated in clause one. Therefore, the parties were similarly bound by the other conditions in that clause. In regard to this clause, supplier exempted from any liability caused by delays or quality of the materials they supplied. However, this did not exempt the contractor from delay since the agreement specified the duration the work was supposed to start and the time it was supposed to end. Therefore, contractor was liable to the extent that he did not materials to be use for the work. However, upon the signing of the agreement, parties deleted clause three that was allowing supplier to deliver substitute materials of his choice. Since Mr. Jack was not contented with the materials delivered for being of inferior quality compared to “mountfield,” the contractor was liable since Mr. Jack had specified in the kind of material he wanted. However, to the extent that the contractor was required to complete the work within a specified time, he ought to make sure materials were supplied in sufficient time to complete the work within required time. This is because he ought to know that delay in supplying of materials was tantamount to failure of the contract since he could not be able to complete his work within specified time. Mr. Jack could sue the contractor for compensatory damages since contractor failed to perform his contractual obligations. This is because, Mr. Jack relied on the contractor’s performance of the contract hoping that he would build patio from where he could be able to host his guests. When the contractor failed to accomplish his duties, Mr. Jack had no other option but to hire a hall from where he could conduct his ceremonies. The case is similar to that of Anglia Television Ltd. v. Reed, [1971] 3 All E.R. 690. In this case the English court awarded the plaintiff for the loss suffered in preparation for the performance of a play in which the defendant failed to turn up against the contract.19 Therefore, Mr. Jack could sue Mr. Donald for consequential damages for the expenses he incurred to rent another place for the purpose. This is according the rule decided in Hadley v Baxendale [1854] EWHC J70 where the plaintiff sued defendant for delaying delivery of the broken crankshaft that would enable the plaintiff get a new one from the supplier.20 This delay caused the plaintiff some loss in earnings since the business remained closed for some time. In this case, Mr. Jack incurred additional cost of hiring a hall for hosting his guests hence he deserved compensation from the contactor for failing to complete work in time. This is because the situation was similar to the case in Sotiros Shipping Inc -v- Sameiet: The Solholt [1981] 2 Lloyd's Rep 574 in which the plaintiff was able to recover damages for the loss he suffered after the defendant failed to deliver the vessel as was required hence causing the plaintiff to terminate the contract and sue for damages.21 If Mr. Donald has to defend himself, he has to prove to the court that the delay was beyond his control.22 He may wish to state his defence that the delay was caused by terrible weather conditions because that made his workers to defect to other places to look for jobs. However, Mr. Jack had pointed out the issue of interference of the weather and therefore wanted the contractor to commence his work earlier before the fall of the rain. Since Mr. Donald was aware of this condition, but insisted on working during that time, he cannot succeed in his defence by basing his claim on the interference of weather. It is unfortunate that he could not get extra workers to complete the work during that period, but he should have been aware of this since Mr. Jack had warned him of such a possibility. Since Mr. Jack had contacted him long before the occurrence of the rain and even advised Mr. Donald to start the work earlier before the rainy season, it was the contractors fault for delaying and agreeing to sign the contract to work during that period by insisting that he would put enough measures to manage the situation. The contractor cannot defend himself on the claim that Mr. Jack barred him from assessing the construction site. According to the law of contract, if a party to the contract cause the other party not to be able to execute his or her obligations that party can sue for interference before the court and claim for damages.23 However, this can only take place if the contract was in effect at the time of interference and that that the other party was aware of the effect his action could have on the contact. However, in this case the contractor cannot sue for interference since the time of contract had expired. In fact, Mr. Jack my claim the contractor was trespassing and sues him in the law of tort.24 This is because once the duration in which the contractor was allowed to work for the Mr. Jack ended; the contractor cannot access the site after lapse of reasonable time since this will amount to trespass. In conclusion, a legal agreement binds the parties to the extent of the terms stated in the agreement. The parties to the agreement should ensure they discharge their obligations as stated in the agreement without defaulting. The aim of the agreement is to determine the duties the parties owe each other and the repercussions for not adhering to the requirements of the agreement. The defaulting party may be required by the law to fulfil the obligations of the agreement of pay off the other party for the loss suffered. However, the wronged party has a duty to proof that the loss suffered was caused by mistake of the other party and that he or she did all she could to avert the loss from occurring. Bibliography Anglia Television Ltd. v. Reed, [1971] 3 All E.R. 690. Beale, H., Tallon, D., Vogenauer, S., Rutgers, J. W., & Fauvarque-Cosson, B. (2010). Cases, Materials and Text on Contract Law. Hart. Collins, H. (1994). Good Faith in European Contract Law. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 14(2), 229-254. Deakin, S., Johnston, A., & Markesinis, B. (2012). Markesinis & Deakin's Tort Law. Oxford University Press. Deepa, V. (2001). Tortious Interference and the Law of Contract: The Case for Specific Performance Revisited. The Yale Law Journal, 111(3); 43-76 Glachant, J. (2002). The Economics of Contracts: Theories and Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 324-405. Gordley, J. (2001). The Enforceability of Promises in European Contract Law, Cambridge University Press , Cambridge, 124-165 Hadley v Baxendale [1854] EWHC J70 Paul, K. F. (2007). Judicial Review and the Limits of Arbitral Authority: Lessons from the Law of Contract. St. John's Law Review, 81(1/2). 23-65 Perry, S. R. (1991). Moral Foundations of Tort Law, The. Iowa L. Rev., 77, 449. Posner, R. A. (2006). Common-Law Economic Torts: An Economic and Legal Analysis. Ariz. L. Rev., 48, 735. Slawson, W. D. (1996) Binding Promises: The Late 20th Century Reformation of Contract Law Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ 65-97. Sotiros Shipping Inc -v- Sameiet: The Solholt [1981] 2 Lloyd's Rep 574 Trakman, L. E. (1983). Frustrated Contracts and Legal Fictions. The Modern Law Review, 46(1), 39-55. Marshall, A. B. (2012). Reconsidering the Proper Law of the Contract: Melbourne Journal of International Law, 13(1); 21-48 Van Dam, C. (2006). European Tort Law. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Williams, K. (2006). Politics, the Media and Refining the Notion of Fault: Section 1 of the Compensation Act 2006. Journal of Personal Injury Law, 100, 347. Read More