Contractual terms and conditions - Case Study Example

There existed a breach of this legal duty and that he sustained personal or property injury ( Rush & Ottley, 2006, p. 79). The standard of care determines whether an individual is guilty or not guilty of negligence. However, the degree of care varies according to a case. According to the case of Thorton v Shoe Lane Parking (1971) relates to the above case. Despite the numeral notices around the premises where the plaintiff was parking his car, held that the defendant was guilty. Even though the plaintiff contributed partly to the happening of the accident he relied on the exemption clause that he was not aware of the notices put by the defendant.

Thus, the plaintiff should be paid damages as he suffers personal injury. The defendant contributed to the negligence by breaching the duty of care ( Rush & Ottley, 2006, p. 80). In addition, following the case of Interfoto Picture Library Limited v Steletto Visual Programmes Limited (1988), the court held that nothing had been done to attract attention of third party. Therefore, the company ought to have extended its responsibility by creating notices in strategic places and clearly pointing out of the underlying risks if any.

Through this, firm will be able to avoid liabilities should an accident occur ( Rush & Ottley, 2006, p. 80). . The effect of breach of contract always gives the plaintiff the right to file a legal suit to claim for damages. For example, in the case of Poussard v Spier the court held that Poussard breached the contract as she was needed to perform from day one. Similarly, in this case the defendant failed to honor his part of the promise causing injuries to the plaintiff. The court will then determine the amount that should be paid to the plaintiff since it is not a liquidated contract.

The defendant though not a fault of his own to fail to deliver the machine inflicted injury to the plaintiff making him to loss business (Stone, 2013, p. 254). Very Clean Laundry made their intention to the Commercial Machine Industry stating that it urgently required a new boiler. This could enable it to serve its firm and growing market. Therefore, Commercial Machine Industry had a legal duty to supply the machine within a reasonable time. This did not happen until it was five months later.

As a result, the company becomes liable for breach of contract. Very Clean Laundry were justified to request for compensation, and relied on this fact, to go ahead to assume more contracts. As a result, it suffered loss because it could not secure a larger dyeing contract. In addition, the business incurred daily business as customer contract could not be executed. Under the law of contract, it provides that when a person breaches a contract the injured party should seek legal compensation in a court of law (Stone, 2013, p. 256). Reference Stone, R. (2013), The Modern Law of Contract,New York: Routledge.

Case Study 3 Under the law of contract, there are two terms that ought to be