Case Scenarios/421 - Essay Example

Law Case Law Case Jeff wants the contract between him and Steve cancelled, due to his inability to continue honouring the terms of the contract, which is paying Steve $ 200 on a monthly basis. According to contract law, the contract is officially operational, since the performance has been substantially undertaken between Jeff and Steve. As such, with regard to modern day view of unilateral contracts, the contract between Jeff and Steve cannot be revoked. Jeff has to find another way of honouring the $ 200 monthly payment to Steve (Miller & Jentz, 2010, p. 164). Grocery, Inc.

has the right under the contract law to cancel the contract, because the terms were not honoured (Miller & Jentz, 2010, p. 164). Article 2 of the UCC governs sales contracts. Although Cereal, Inc. had the obligation to honour its part of the bargain, under the provisions of gap-filling, Cereal, Inc. had legal rights to modify the contract terms, especially regarding how to distribute the cereal product and their composition to the various Grocery, Inc.’s outlets (Miller, 2010, p. 227). The defence available for Cereal, Inc.

is the effects of flood. The contract between Harry and Tom was an express oral contract. Tom offered to sell his trains to Harry on retirement, by word of mouth. He knew Harry had made arrangements of buying the trains by spending his savings on building a new room for the trains and borrowing money for the same. By selling his trains to David, he breached the oral express contract. The winner is Harry. Under contract law, he can bind Tom to sell him the trains or pay him for the expenses incurred (Miller & Jentz, 2010, p. 164). ReferencesMiller, R. L., & Jentz, G. A. (2010).

Fundamentals of Business Law: Excerpted Cases. Mason: South- Western Cengage Leaning. Miller, R. L. (2010). Fundamentals of Business Law: Summarized Cases. Mason: South-Western Cengage Leaning.