Contract between Pat and Big Industry - Assignment Example

Case assignment Name University Affiliation Question 1 Is there a valid enforceable contract between Pat and Big Industry? If so, What are the terms of the contract? What effect did the April 15 phone call between Pat and Hillary have on the contract terms? From the case study, there is a valid enforceable contract between Pat and Big industry ltd. We have been told that both parties met and signed a contact where Pat had to create four system programs that he would complete within the specific time. The Big industry ltd agreed to pay Pat $25,000 when he delivers the work. Actually, this was a valid contract because all the requirements for a valid contract to exist were present. Just in brief, the elements of a valid contract are; that the parties entering into the contract should be a mutual agreement between the parties (Ciro &Goldwaser, 2006). Here we find that both parties were both willing to enter into the agreement. Pat and the company agreed to sign the agreement willingly. Secondly, there should be a consideration. This is anything of value that is given in exchange of the services. The company would get the four programs and Pat would be paid $25,000 in turn. Thirdly, the parties entering into a contract should be legally competent. This means that the parties should have attained the age of contractual capacity which always 18 years. In this case both of these parties had attained this age. The fourth element is that the contract should legal objective (Ciro &Goldwaser, 2006). The agreement should be legally acceptable. From the look, this contract was allowed by law. Then lastly the contact should be written and signed by both parties willingly. We have been told from this case that Pat and the company wrote and signed this agreement to legalize it. Therefore, this contract qualifies to be enforceable because it meets all the elements of a valid contract. The terms of this contract is that pat creates four seems for the company and he would be paid the due amount. The April 15 call actually showed that Pat would not deliver his work in the agreed time. This was because some of the computer software of the company was actually obsolete a factor which incapacitated Pat in getting the relevant information that he would use to create the programs. This implies that the contract would be breached. In really sense the contract had not been breached since the time agreed had not elapsed. However, Hillary nodded to Pat that due to computer problems, he can still allow him to finish the work by 15 May instead of 1 May the agreed date. This was some kind of relief to Pat and he worked hard to fix the problem on program 3 and 4. In really sense, the April 15 call did not have any influence on the contract signed. This is because the parties just talked verbally on phone; there was no evidence to show that they agreed to extend the deadline for the contract. This implies that the initial terms remained the same. It implies that when Pat could not complete the work within the agreed period that is by 1 May, he can be successful sued in court by Big industry ltd for the breaching the terms of the contract. Therefore, there was not legal effect the call had to the contract that had signed. Thus, incase Pat would not complete the worked by 1 May; the company can sue on the basis of breaching the terms of the contract. The court can ask Pat to pay the damages he made to company and render the contract to void. However, when this happen, Pat can defend in court by citing that it was not his will to delay the company, but the problem emanated from the side of the company where some of its computers had lost most of the crucial information he could use top create credible programs for it. He argues ague this way basing on the defense of contributory negligence (Crisling & Murphy, 2000). He can convince the court that the course of the delay was to due the negligence of the company because the company did not ensure that its sources of information are clear. It just assumed that Pat would have to deliver his work without considering where if the sources where the information would be retrieved are reliable. Question 2 Can Pat prevails in a legal action against Big Industry for breach of contract? What defences could Big Industry rely on in contract? (8 marks) Absolutely yes! Pat can successfully take a legal action against Big industry ltd for breaching the contract. We find during the 28 April call Hillary the executive of this company saying that he was considering hiring another consultant since Pat seemed not to deliver the work before the specified period. The date of agreement was 1 May and the day Hillary was cancelling the contract and telling Pat that the company owes him nothing was 28 April. This is wrong, the date of agreement had not reached and Hillary is already terminating the contract claiming that Pat had not delivered. Therefore, when Pat seeks a legal action against the company, he obviously wins the case because Hillary terminated the contract before it matured. In fact he assured Hilary that program 1 and 2 would be complete before 1 May but he had only doubt with program 3 and 4 which he assured he can deliver on 12 May. On the other hand the company can defend itself in court that the plaintiff implied that he would not complete the work on the agreed date. It can prove to the court that from April 28 to 1 May has a difference of only two days and Pat had not delivered been one program that is why it decides to terminate the contract. The defendant can base its arguments on the defense of necessity (Crisling & Murphy, 2000).The company saw the necessity of terminating the contract and takes another consultant to do the job because of the urgency and necessity of the program. It was necessary to take another consultant because of the dire need of the programs in the shortest time possible. Therefore, it could not put all the trust in Pat since he had already showed that he could not deliver in time. Therefore, it could not wait to suffer losses that it is still waiting for Pat and his programs. The company can easily prove in court that the contract had already been by Pat because they agreed that he will be able to deliver all the work before 1 May. Thu, when Pat does not argue very well and convince the court jury, he can easily loose the case. When the court finds the company guilty, it will instruct it to pay Pat his dues as agreed in the contract. But when it finds that Pat was guilt, it will terminate the contract and become void thus, Pat would not be compensated by the company. Question 3 What remedies might the parties be able to rely on in contract law? (8 marks) In court cases, the aggrieved party seeks the court’s justices for the injustices done to it by the other party. There are a number of remedies the court can use to give justice to the parties in the litigation. For example in this case study, the likely remedies the court can award are; specific performance, injunction, and recession. Injunction is an equitable remedy where the court orders and enforces. In injunction, the court may require a particular action to be done or stopped. The injunction remedy can be prohibitory or mandatory (Comasters.com.au, 2000). Prohibitory injunction is where the court orders a certain action to be stopped immediately by a particular party because it may be causing harm. Mandatory injunction is where by the court orders a party to perform a particular action. In this case study, the court may for example impose a mandatory injunction to Big Industries limited because it terminated the contract before it matured. Therefore, the court can force the company to accept Pat’s program and pay him as agreed all the dues. An injunction to be ordered by the court is done after a judicial review (Comasters.com.au, 2000). Judicial review here refers to review of the previous circumstances to determine whether the contract was validly signed. The second remedy is specific performance. Particular party may require the court to order specific performance to another party; this where the court ask the defendant to perform exactly the kind of duty required of it as signed in the contract (Ciro &Goldwaser, 2006). This remedy in most cases is ordered in case one party does not comply fully with the contract as agreed. In this case study, the Big industry company may ask the court to impose the remedy of specific performance to Pat. It may order Pat to complete the work in the specified time agreed during the signing of the contract. In simple terms, we can say that this remedy of specific performance Another remedy that can apply to this case study is recession. Recession can be defined as the unmaking of the contract between the parties, in other terms it is the unwinding of the contract (Crisling & Murphy, 2000). This meant to bring the parties to the contract to the previous position they were before they entered into the contact. In simple terms recession is the revocation of the contract. The court can revoke or cancel the contract after finding out that may either of the party has maliciously breached the contract for his selfish gain. The court makes orders that are aimed at restoring the parties to the position they were before the contract was entered. This implies that the money and all the goods that had been paid or used are returned to the other party. The ordering of the recession remedy by the court generally means that one party had breached the conditions of the contract. This remedy can be applied to this case in that the court can order Big industry ltd not to take another consultant but to make a fresh contact with Pat and he completes his work as required in the new agreement. This remedy as mention it aims at bringing the parties involved into a contract to the original position before the contract was signed. References Baron, M. L. (2006). Fundamentals of business law. North Ryde. Mc Graw-Hill Ciro, T 7Goldwaser, V. (2006). Law and business. Melbourne. Oxford University press. Crisling, G. & Murphy, H. M. (2000). How to study business law. 3ed. Sydney. Butterworths. Australia. Comasters.com.au. (2000). Injunctions. Retrieved from http://www.comasters.com.au/Comasters_Articles/Injunctions_08.11.26.pdf Gibson, A. & Fraser, D. (2007). Business law. French Forest Prentice Hall. USA Read More