Business law case study essay

This kind of essay is going to discuss the situation study simply by firstly identifying four components of contract, after that justifying tasks of Mr. Martin with applying the guidelines of pre-existing contractual obligations. Finally an analysis about component payment of debt and promissory estoppel will be discussed. Likewise, this essay can evaluate the familiarity with common law and organization relationship.

PROBLEM 1

a) Four essential elements of a contract should be Offer, Acceptance, Goal to create legal relations and Consideration. First of all, offer, relating to Adams(2012), is a full and obvious statement of the terms(p79) send to a party(the offeree) simply by another party(the offeror).

In any other case there could be a misunderstanding of an invitation to deal with or discussion which are identical statements. If an offer intends to be legitimately binding, approval, by which the offerees can present their agreement of all the the offer, is needed. Acceptance has to be valid and informing the offeror, even though the terms should certainly as identical to the previous types.

Another element, we. e. account, aims to guarantee the promise built is of benefit.

As described by Jones (2011), the consideration has to give rewards to the 1, who is battling a damage at the same time. Lastly, while producing an agreement to get legally enforceable, intention to produce legal relationships is important. When judging unique a holding contract or perhaps not, the specific situation to make this contract has to be considered, put simply, according to Adams(2012), deal made in a domestic or perhaps social environment will not be bound legally. Otherwise, in the event that parties are going to do a commercial agreement, it will probably be regard while legally bound(Jones, 2011).

b) Mr. Matn need to pay the 750 because of two factors, based on 3 cases been around as judicial precedents, that are Stilk versus Myrick(1809), Hartley v Ponsonby(1857) and Williams v Roffey bros(1990)One perspective is that there is an additional benefit within the new contract, though Mr. Matn and Joe the designer were being within pre-existing agreement. Hold the old contract is certainly not over, because of the other part of reason, Mister. martin needs to pay the excess money in so that it will avoid the reduction. These afore-mentioned two points will probably be justified simply by cases. Stilk v Myrick(1809) indicates that acaptain promised the seamen extra money if perhaps they did successfully return back residence.

The court finally keep that the captain is certainly not duty to pay the additional money for the reason that old contract is been with us as there isn’t of additional worth. While Harley v Ponsonby(1857) was held which the captain has to pay the additional money, although situation is similar, because the the courtroom consider there is extra value added to the new contract, although the old agreement is discharged. There are some similarities among both of these cases and Mr. Martin’ s circumstance. Mr. Martin also have an existed contract as each party are consented to terms of the contract, although comparing to Stilk’s circumstance, Bob the builder suggest a sub-contract with consider an additional value, which is the significance of Martin’s seafoods. Meantime, due to bad weather and sick deck hands, Marin have to pay extra money to make certain this extra value can be secured, yet , this does not means the old contract is over as the contract can be fulfilled though it may probably be expiry, since Martin must pay extra 750 in spite of the repayment of the earlier contract.

On the other hand, in Williams v Rpffey bros, the claimant consider the loss of accused if the process is not finished on time, so the accused do have to pay out the claimant the extra cash as promised. In this case, Bob the designer consider the benefit of Martin so that they suggest the sub-contractor. As Mr. Marin accepted Bob’s counter give and Bob help him avoid the decrease of an amount of sea food. According to the precedent of Williams’ case, seeing that new value to regarded as, Mr. Matn should pay the extra 750. To be came to the conclusion, by talking about pre-existing duties, Mr. Martin is appreciated to shell out the extra 750.

c) Mister. Martin has to pay the complete 750, when he violates the rule of part repayment of debts. When consider the part repayment of financial debt, it is necessary to concern the guideline in Pinnel’s Case(1602), by which illustrated that part payment is not only a sufficient account. Because borrowers obtains a benefit with supplying nothing of value to the lenders. In Marin’s case, Joe agreed to agree to a lower payment(350) in full arrangement despite of virtually any excuse Mister. Marin has used. Obviously, Mister. Martin received a benefit of 400, although Bob attained nothing. Consequently , Mr. Marin provided not any consideration in cases like this, because staying sympathizing Martin’s bankrupt simply cannot gain more value for Bob. Since two parties did not achieve advantages of two factors, the assurance ofBob is not holding.

As a result, Martin has to pay the full 750 as a legal duty. Apart from that, with regard from the classical High Trees Home Case(1947), the principle of promissory estoppel by placed that the claimants can acquire the arrears after the end in the war because they have the capacity of professing the retrieve the previous selling price before the warfare started. Yet , they are averted to take back again the amount of debts failed to shell out because of their past promise. In High Tress House Circumstance, the promise was generate on a genuine situation where two parties would consider their benefits as a result achieve advantages of both sides. Particularly, the defendants get the correct of rent whilst the claimants obtained a number of revenue.

While in Martin’s circumstance, no matter whether Mr. Martin have got difficulties in the financial situation or perhaps not, there may be still zero consideration to get Bob the builder, though Mr. Martin do include a benefit of saving 400. Since there is no consideration exist, Greg is not really obliged to obey the rule of promissory estoppel. To be summarised, by speaking about the part payment of financial debt and promissory estoppel, it is responsible for Mr. Martin to pay the full 750. As Promissory estoppel is around the doctrine of equality.

ISSUE 2

Relating to PPP(n. d. ), the common legislation is the legislation comprises the custom and judicial precedents of the legal courts. First characteristic of prevalent law is that it is not codified, making it is usually not coming from the comprehensive legislation which is made through Legislative house. Apart from EUROPEAN UNION enforceable law, common legislation depends on the distributed courts, in where legal decisions are created. In other words, prevalent law is definitely the certain rules made by all judges. The decisions have been manufactured in similar cases would turn into precedents, which mainly compose the common law. These precedents will be accumulated and registered as famous documents or files after some time.

When approaching a new circumstance, these precedents would be utilized in the decision, which means precedents make future decision bound legally. Hierarchy should be referred to when talking about the precedent, while not every precedent will be used in judging a new case. The precedent manufactured in a higher the courtroom can be used in a reduce court, or else it will not be appropriate. For example , a judicial decision, i. e. precedent, already made in courtroom of appeal should be relevant in excessive court or perhaps county courtroom, but a conclusion made in countycourt should not appreciative to follow for high the courtroom. On the other hand, the courts can overturn the decisions of these in same level. Finally, the common regulation make agreement more freedom, which means you will find few restrictions to restrict agreements. Basically, almost everything could be satisfactory even if there is extremely unacceptable by law(Adams, 2012 and Jones, 2011).

QUESTION several

According to Adams(2012) and Jones(2011), the relationships among agency and principal happen to be fiduciary kinds. Basically, agents do not have legal right to repayment unless the principal authorise the best. Generally payment must not be credited until the agent have satisfied the expected result of main, otherwise, repayment can not be employed among any certain method on the romantic relationship. However , agent can be regularly paid when agreement share willingness of both sides. An additional right of agent is always to claim indemnity if there is any kind of expenses sustained when agent conduct the authority, no matter the agent is definitely gratuitous or perhaps not. On the other hand, agents carry out have obligation to possess sensible care and skill, additionally, an agent with professional or trade skill is likely to preserve the skill sets as executing a operate or job.

Then, a contractual agent must carry out the arranged tasks plus the whole means of achieving the effect should stick to the principal’s instructions. Therefore , an agent needs to perform his tasks himself. The performance in the duties cannot be delegated to the third party. Furthermore, the agent is required to become accountable for virtually any profits as a result of the efficiency of the duties and to record the benefits of physical exercises of specialist. Besides, a real estate agent has work to avoid associated with being conflict with client positions without principal’s permit, though agent should not sell his own home or stocks and shares to primary. Last but not least, a representative not only are unable to take any form of entice, but also cannot generate secret earnings, whereby the principal can dismiss the agent and associated with contract voidable for scam.

In conclusion, case study has been reviewed by applying the related legislation knowledge when it comes to consideration of contract particularly. Therefore , basic explanation of common law and, obligations and privileges within organization relationship happen to be demonstrated.

Bibliography

Adams, A (2012), Law for people who do buiness students(7th ed), London: Pearson Education Limited. Public exclusive partnership(n. d. ), Crucial features of prevalent law or perhaps civil legislation systems, Sold at: http://ppp.worldbank.org/public-private-partnership/legislation-regulation/framework-assessment/legal-systems/common-vs-civil-law. (Assessed 22 Feb 2014) Jones, L (2011), Introduction to Business Law, New york city: Oxford College or university Press. Central London Property Trust v High Trees Home (1947) KB 130, forty-four, 53, one hundred ten, 119, 595 Hartley v Ponsonby(1875) six EL BL 872, 106

Pinnel’s Case (1602) a few Co Associate 117, 108, 109, 117, 595

Stilk versus Myrick (1809) 2 Camp 317, 106, 107, 589

Williams v Roffey Bros (1990) 1 MOST ER 512 CA, 107-109, 118, 119

You may also be thinking about the following: pinnel’s case, pinnel case

1

Tweet

Related essay