Law of Contract and Specific Relief - Assignment Example

Students Name Institution Supervisors Name Date 1. Whether Sasha would succeed in a claim to the effect that Vladimir should be bound by the advertisement on the Notice Board? Illustrate your answer with decided common law cases, providing the basis of your reasoning. The issue involves the lease of a property by Vladimir who owns thee Lew Hoa Shopping complex. However the shopping complex is leased on Vladimir’s behalf at good rates. At this time Sasha a business lady is looking for a venue to sell her rage of dresses. After reading the note she decides to call Vladimir who reiterates to her that his terms of leas are $1000 per week for a period of 12months, however with this his tenants will have to cater for all the outgoing electricity charges in the rental payment. This is a case of contract law, according to the law, there are several rules that govern any relationship that exists between two parties with regard to a situation where one one of the parties is involved in selling goods, or provides certain services or there is an exchange of interest or ownership. The law of contract has thus been formerly looked at as being a promise or set of promises that the law has the task of enforcing, here is where Vladmir can base his argument. With regard to the case discussed above, the contract arose as a plethora of scenarios, there will also be need for the courts to intervene an enforce the agreement with regard to the terms that were laid in the first place. The law of contract actually confirms the foundation for any agreement that would be created between the two parties. The above issue can also be looked at with regard to the case of Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. 1 the case involved the defendant company that had put across an advertisement on smoke balls as being a preventive measure against influenza and common cold. According to the advertisement, the company was going to give 100 pounds to any person that used the product for not less that three times each day for two weeks and would still have contracted the illness. According to the defendant, the company also placed 1000 pounds in the bank account so as to prove that they were sincere in their offer. With this regard, the claimant took the challenge and after about a period of 8 weeks she contracted flue. This is where Mrs. Carliff claimed the 100pound, however, the defendant did not own up claiming that there was not contract for her to be able to enforce that claim. After the matter was taken to court of appeal, the defendant continued to argue that he had no intentions whatsoever to come up with any kind of legal relations between him and the claimant, that the advertisement was nothing more than a simple invitation, there was no time that the claimant has responded saying that she accepted the offer. However, the court of appeal when ahead to confirm that there was in fact a contract between the company and the claimant. This type of contract is referred to as a unilateral contract where one part offers money in exchange of a performance. This means that it was not a must that the claimant informs the defendant that she had accepted the offer. The same case would apply to sashaandVladmir whereby after he set the term and conditions for the leas, there was no need for sasha to again come back and inform that she had accepted the offer, all she had to do was to follow as the lease terms had suggested. (ii) Advice I would give to Sasha? The advice I would give to Sasha would to try and raise stakes to win the agreement, this is because there was an offer and a set date for her to accept, meaning that Vladmir had an upper hand on the offer with regard to the lease. If sally would have accepted the offer earlier enough then Vladmir would not consider leasing it to another party. The issue does not also put Vladmir under breach of any contract. The case is the same as that of Adams v. Lindsell (1818) 1 B. & Ald. 6812 According to this case, we look at an acceptance to an offer and how the acceptance of that offer was communicated to the offeror. According to the case, the defendant offered to sell fleeces wool to the claimant for a certain price. However among the terms of sale was that the response be made by post .the letter however was misdirected by the defendant so that it seems like the letter was not received in three days from the time it was sent. With this regard, the claimant decided to accept this offer and respond on the same day. The post was made on 5th of September and received on 9th of septembe the same year, however, according to the issue, the defendant decided that they do not receive the same letter on 8th of September so he decided to sell the wool to another person. The claimant however indicated that the contract was binding as he had already accepted the offer. With this regard, the court also held that the delay was entire the fault of the offeror and if the letter was posted with the right channel , the the scenario could not have arisen as it did. To add on the above, the contract was done in 5th September which is the time the acceptance was posted and not the time it was not received. And even if the agreement was not received by the offeror, it did not mean that the offer was not accepted and that the contract was not created. And if they decided otherwise, then it mean that they would have prevented the contract from being created. With regard to Sasha and Vladimir, the offer of lease itself can only be communicated to Sasha through a notification , and if there would be any other pre-emptive negotiations or discussions, this would only amount to nothing else that an invitation to treat. This means that Vladimir in this case will not be as the other one, and would definitely win the case[Chr111]. (iii) Advise Roberto as to his legal position. You should cite relevant case law and provide the basis of your reasoning. (10 marks). This is a case of an implied contract. This usually occurs when two parties agree on terms but there is no documentation to prove that the agreement was binding. An implied contract also occurs due to mutual trust that is created between the two parties. Like it happened between Roberto and Vladimir. The idea of mutual trust and confidence is regarded as an implied term that is placed into the contract of lease. It is worth noting that other implied terms exist within a contract of the lease. These can be compared and contrasted against the principles of expressed terms[Phiic]. The ideas of an implied terms include the notion of obedience between buyer and the seller; the duty of co-operation, again between Vladimir and Roberto in this case; and finally, the duty of fidelity, which is totally influenced by the principles of equity. The idea of the contract of lease is to place both parties to it in a position of bargaining. This is the general principle of contract law and is designed to provide both parties to the contract with mutually beneficial things. It is worth noting though that terms can be implied into contracts of the lease when it gives either business efficacy or can objectively viewed by the officious bystander. Thus, the usage of an implied term could be objectively viewed in accordance with the principles and nature of the contract. Further, according to Bowen LJ's dictum in the case of The Moorcock, an implied term must be ‘founded on presumed intention and upon reason'. So this means that Vladimir my win the case so long as he proves the contract was not binding[Hug13]. Questions 2 to 11 TRUE/FALSE QUESTIONS 1. If I display prescription drugs with the price stated on each cardboard pack of drugs, I am making an offer to any customer who walks in. (TRUE) 2. There is no limit to the number of people that I can make an offer to. (TRUE) 3. There is no requirement for an intention to create legal relations in order for there to be a valid contract. (FALSE) 4. In promissory estoppel there is no requirement for the promisor to unfairly break a promise.(TRUE) 5. For equitable estoppel to apply parties need not be in a contractual relationship. (TRUE) 6. The common law has provided solutions to all situations. (TRUE) 7. In the case of Donoghue v Stevenson the court held that the manufacturers of the ginger beer owed no duty of care to the plaintiff as no contract existed between the manufacturers and the plaintiff. (TRUE). 8. Historically, speaking legislation existed in Australia long before common law. The position is the reverse as far as the UK is concerned. (FALSE) 9. The Australia Act 1986 (Cth) was passed in order for the States and Territories to maintain effective control of the Commonwealth.(TRUE) 10. The Executive arm of the government in Australia is entrusted with the task of administering the laws of Australia.(TRUE). Sources Chr111: , (Barton, 2011), Phiic: , (Clarke & Clarke, 2012), Hug13: , (Beale, 2013), Read More