The M and S Contract - Case Study Example

The M & S Contract Question Sally and Mary are married but same sex marriages are not recognized in Utopia. Their marriage is not recognized in Utopia. Mary and Sally simply live together according to the law in Utopia. On purchasing property at Happy Acres Senior Retirement Living Mary and Sally signed a contract with John. The Contract was titled Installment Sales Contract. In this contract, John was termed as the “Seller” and Mary and Sally were termed as the “Purchaser”. Mary and Sally purchased lot 4 by the signing of the Mary and Sally Contract. On reviewing the contract terms, Mary and Sally are purchasers. Mary and Sally fulfilled the terms laid out on the contract with regards to the payment of purchase price clause. The Purchaser was to pay monthly installments on the first day of every month. Up to the point of Mary contacting the Seller on the need to terminate the contract, the Purchaser had made all payments as laid out up to that point. The purchaser has fulfilled all her contract negotiations. John, the Seller, violated the building code of the city. Sally fell down the stairs to the basement and the lack of the railings might have aggravated the situation. John had a duty to comply with the terms laid out on the building code and failure to do this is a tort which the specific element being failure to practice a duty (Schlanger& Spaulding, 1). John, being the seller in the contract also breached the terms of the contract which is also a tort (Schlanger& Spaulding, 1). The contract specifically mentioned that the Purchaser can terminate the contract during the first five years if no longer able to live due to a need to move to a nursing home. Sally is a Purchaser and she has a need to move to a nursing home. Mary notified John the need and even offered the doctor’s letter as proof. John forcing Mary to pay for an extra month was wrong. Mary is therefore in a position to take John to court on accounts of breach of contract and on negligence of duty (Schlanger& Spaulding, 1). The only additional information required would be the contract the Seller and the Purchaser signed did not clearly indicate the period which the Purchaser need to give the notice to the Seller with regards to the termination. This is a crucial piece of information that is missing. Question 2 On signing the M & S contract, John as the Seller and Mary and Sally as the Purchasers agreed to the terms set out on the contract. John needs to understand that the terms on the contract are binding. Mary is acting within her rights by notifying John on her need to terminate the contract because of the arising issue that her domestic partner, Sally, who is also a Purchaser in this case need to be moved to nursing home. This stipulation is clear and upon receipt of such a request, the Seller is to agree to terminate the contract and refund the Purchaser’s payments up to the point of termination less a termination fee. John would therefore be charged with breach of contract if he fails to follow on these terms (Schlanger& Spaulding, 1). John demanding that Mary continues to make payments is not in line with the contract. According to the terms that were laid out, there was no stipulation on the period which a notice for termination should be given. John would simply be at fault demanding for more payments. If Mary does not make the payments John demands for, she is not at fault. The contract clearly states that when a Purchaser is exercising her right to terminate and receive a refund within the first five years, any payment not cured within thirty day is not considered a default. This is the case in the current situation. Finally, John as the Seller is liable to be accused on torts law. It is his duty to enclose all the necessary information when going into a contract with another partner and failure to do so is a violation. John should have let the Purchaser know what the land that lot 4 lies on used to be used for. Question 3 Mary and Sally aired purchased their property through Billy. Billy was a broker and represented the Seller, John. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that any information that Billy relayed to the Purchaser was true and reflected the true facts as per the Seller, John. Mary is acting within her rights to cancel the M & S contract. This is because not all the details were fully disclosed to her on purchasing of the property. In fact, Billy was dishonest, non-intentionally when Mary inquired on the past activity the land used to be used for.Mary is justified to demand termination of contract on the account that John can be charged with negligence(Schlanger& Spaulding, 1) on the part that it was his duty as the Seller to disclose any information to the Purchasers with regards to the property that was on sale which he owned. This information should have been set out clearly and even his broker should have known and not just assumed. Mary is also within her rights to demand for termination of the M & S contract on account of the fact that the property seller, John, was negligent by not clearly laying out safety precautions that were to practiced when occupying the property. This would have helped to prevent the accident as Sally carelessly threw the cigarette since she didn’t know she had a cause to practice safety measures on account of the smoking. Question 4 Jack’s Last Chance Liqour Store is a good opportunity for business to John and the Lots are bound to give a better return as John sees it. However, John developed Happy Acres as a senior retirement community. The property hosts detached family homes. In such a case, it would be important that the residents living on the property do not feel like this is an infringement on the idea they had in mind when buying the homes. This has more to do with the liquor store which may end up driving away residents. The gas station is a good idea. It will be beneficial to the residents that occupy Happy Acres. It is important to know if there is any danger that will be posed by the presence of the gas station being so close to the homes. Information regarding the health and safety hazards that will be posed by the gas station is crucial and John needs to provide this openly without thinking only of the profits that he stands to reap. Work Cited Schlanger, M. & Spaulding, J. A. (2007).Torts. Retrieved Online http://law.wustl.edu/sba/firstyearoutlines/torts/Schlanger/Schlanger-Torts-Spaulding-Fall04.pdf . Read More