Case Scenerio: Big Time Toy Makers - Essay Example

Case scenario: Big Time Toy Makers Case scenario: Big Time Toy Makers Question The two parties did not have a valid contract. The Big Time Toymaker (BTT) agreed to pay Chou $25,000 for negotiation rights for 90 days. They reached another agreement on the 87th day, but no valid contract was made.Question 2#. The fact in favor of Chou is the mutual assent where both parties verbally agreed to enter a deal. The fact that BTT had paid $25000 would assume the deal was going through. Also, the email Chou received asking for a draft of the contract proves that there was an earlier agreement.

The fact against Chou is that there was no signed contract as it was never written. In addition, Chou entered a 90 days negotiation rights agreement with BTT where they agreed that no contract was valid unless in writing.Question 3#. The use of email does not exempt the need for a signed contract. Signatures from both parties are necessary to prove the agreement of specified terms and conditions in the contract. Even though they were communicating through email, there was still no valid contract made.

Question 4#. The statute of fraud applies in this case scenario since two parties are involved and also it is a contract for sale of goods for an amount above $500 as consideration.Question 5#. In this case there was no wrong assumption of the contract basis; therefore, the doctrine of mistake is not applicable. Chou received an email containing a draft of the contract meaning that both parties were aware of the facts of the contract. However, BTT can argue that no binding agreement was made since there was no valid contract.

Question 6#. BTT issued $25000, and Chou accepted. This supports aguendo agreement where Chou was to distribute its products through BTT outlets and BTT would charge for distributing.Question 7#.The remedies that apply include compensation; injunction and specific performance. Chou can seek compensation for anticipated damages as a result of BTT withdrawing from the contract. Injunction is a remedy that will enable Chou to seek a court order to prevent BTT from distributing a similar product. Specific performance is also applicable where Chou could seek a court order for BTT to fulfill its part of the agreement by distributing their products.

ReferenceMelvin, S. (2010).The Legal Environment of Business: A Managerial Approach: Theory to Practice. New York: McGraw-Hill.