Business Law - Big Ben and Jettison, Inc - Case Study Example

Business Law 3000: Case Study No. 3 Big Ben, Inc. case: Issue: Can Big Ben pay his debt to Jettison, Inc. by allowing Jettison to receive payments due and owing Big Ben, Inc. from a separate contract that Big Ben, Inc. had entered into with one of the Big Ben's own customers five years ago Yes. A novation can make this possible. A novation ordinarily arises when a new individual assumes an obligation to pay what was incurred by the original party to the contract and the original debtor is totally released from the obligation, which is transferred to someone else (Law Encyclopedia). The nature of the transaction is dependent upon the agreement between the parties. A novation also takes place when the original parties continue their obligation to one another, but a new agreement is substituted for the old. In order for the novation to be legally binding and enforceable, it must be agreed between all the parties involved and must be in writing as required by law. Lease Agreement case: Issue: What are the liabilities for breach of contract Answer: Breach of contract may be defined as the failure of one of the parties in a contract to abide with the terms or conditions of the contract. It gives rise to a cause of action and the party at fault could be held liable for the payment of damages. The party at fault could be held liable for the actual loss or nominal loss, or both of the aggrieved party. Actual losses are those that can be identified or estimated. Nominal losses are awarded when no apparent loss can be estimated as a result of the breach. In this case, Jettison could be held liable for payment of the actual loss suffered by the lessor which is the payment of the monthly lease for one year. The $250 dollar monthly reduction is not a loss at all so it is not compensable. Sara Student case: Issue/s: Is the employment contract legally binding Is the non-compete clause valid Answer: One of the essential requisites of an employment contract is acceptance by the other party within a reasonable or a given period. The Big Bucks, Inc. offered an employment contract to Sara Student. However, it will only be legally binding if Sara will accept the offer within the prescribed period which is seven (7) days. If Sara fails to accept the offer or if she made a counter-offer within the period given, the offer of an employment contract is deemed rejected. The non-compete clause is a valid provision in an employment contract. It is an agreement that restricts an employee from seeking an employment to a similar institution, or to use the information gained after the employee had left the employer-company who made the agreement. This is to prevent trade secrets and confidential information from being exposed and utilized by other companies. The New York case of Double Click v. Henderson is the leading authority for this case (Nov. 7, 1997, WL 731413, N.Y. Sup. Crt.) Cyber-Deli Caf case: Issue: Is Kevin and his partners liable for the injury sustained by the customer who slipped and wrenched his back at the main dining area of the caf Answer: The premises liability rule is the body of law which makes the owner or possessor of land or property responsible or liable for injuries sustained by a person who is present in a premise (Expert Law). The US Reinstatement of (Second) Torts drafted by the American Law Institute is one of the legal sources of premises of liability. An example of premises liability can arise from a "slip and fall" accident. Slip and fall accident happens when an invitee, a licensee, or a trespasser slipped or fell in a property maintained by the owner or possessor causing him or her an injury as a result of the "dangerous condition" of the place which is known by the owner or possessor but was not anticipated by the injured party. To be legally responsible for the injuries someone suffered from slipping, tripping, or falling on someone else's property, the owner/possessor or the employee of a store, restaurant, or other business must have caused the spill, worn, or torn spot, or other slippery or dangerous surface or item, to be underfoot; must have known of the dangerous surface but did nothing; or, should have known of the dangerous surface because a "reasonable" person taking care of the property would have discovered and removed or repaired it (Find Law). In this case, Kevin could be held liable for the injury sustained by the customer who slipped in the main dining room of the caf only if the above-mentioned requisites exist. The Triple-Decker Sandwich case: The United States Uniform Commercial Code provides that restaurant owners have the legal obligation to protect guests or customers from an injury that may be sustained in consuming foods they serve. Section 2-314 of the Uniform Commercial Code provides that unless excluded or modified, a warranty that the goods shall be merchantable is implied in a contract for their sale if the seller is a merchant with respect to goods of that kind. Under this section, the serving for value of food or drink to be consumed either on the premises or elsewhere is a sale (Global Chefs). The usual incident to which a food service establishment could be liable for breaking this warranty is if a foreign object which is not a natural component the food it served was found and caused damage or injury to a guest. No laws or cases provide for the liability of food service establishments for the choking of food sustained by a guest because of the food it served. However, they have the legal duty to help a guest chocking on food. In this case, Kevin, the customers, and the paramedics are not liable for the choking of food suffered by the woman because it was caused by the woman's own negligence. With regards to the acts of the woman who made threats, distributed fliers telling potential buyers that Kevin and his copartner has contagious disease, and slapped the face of Kevin could be held liable for defamation. The Restatement of (Second) Torts once again provides that one essential element in a defamation action is that the defendant published something defamatory about the plaintiff. A communication is defamatory if "it tends so to harm the reputation of another as to lower him in the estimation of the community or to defer third persons form associating with him". The acts done by the woman were examples of defamatory statements which could make her liable for damages. The Emails case: Issue: Is Kevin liable for the defamatory statements made by one of his customers from the computers in his cyber caf Answer: No. Kevin is not liable. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (CDA) states that "[n]o provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information provider" (Raysman, et al, 2003). In as much as Kevin was not the one who made and published the defamatory statements, he could not be held liable for it. References "Double Click v. Henderson, et al." Retrieved May 10, 2009 at Expert Law. "Premises Liability Law". ." Retrieved May 10, 2009 at Find Law. "Slip and Fall Accidents - Overview". Retrieved May 10, 2009 at Global Chefs. "Legal Obligations: Your Legal Obligations When Serving Food". Retrieved May 10, 2009 at Raysman, Richard, et al. "Publisher, Distributor Liability Under Communications Decency Act". New York Journal (Online). Retrieved May 10, 2009 at Read More