• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month
Page
  1. 1
    1
  2. 2
    2
  3. 3
    3
  4. 4
    4
  5. 5
    5
  6. 6
    6
  7. 7
    7
  8. 8
    8
  9. 9
    9
  10. 10
    10

Contract law - Case study.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Both the parties in the question have come to a problematic situation which is complicated to resolve. Friend's of the Forest (Friends), represented by Christabel, is involved in a commercial trade with Paper Supplies Pty Ltd (Paper) which is represented by Dee. A contract needs four essential elements to exist. In the situation, it is obvious that the four elements are satisfied. As the details are not fully provided, it is arguable as to when the contract was formed which will affect the legal rights and obligations of both parties. The first main issues to be discussed regarding the contract is whether is the exemption clause binding and enforceable, is the document contractual in nature, and was the exemption clause a term of the contract. It is arguable that the contract was formed only after the goods and delivery note had been delivered, and Christabel retained the goods without making any objection to the conditions on the note. But this did not mean that all conditions contained in the note were terms of the contract. It was not possible for Christabel to negotiate the terms in the document as it was delivered by the driver and is reasonable to assume that the driver is not an agent of Paper. Thus, Christabel could not negotiate the terms with Dee.1 Nevertheless, Christabel did sign the document which will become binding as the fact that a person that has signed a document is strong evidence that the person has agreed to be bound by it. ...read more.

Middle

In the situation, Christabel was shown Paper's letterhead which looked to be the type and quality that she had specified as a sample. But the paper she received appeared to be far different from the sample as they were thick, coarsely textured and heavily impregnated with chemicals which rendered them to become unmerchantable. It is arguable that Christabel could not inspect all the boxes of papers as there were 200 large boxes and it is only normal to inspect one box. Because of this, Christabel was misled to accept the bulk of unmerchantable papers. Paper has once again breached an implied term which is the Goods Act Part I s.20 (2) which will provide Christabel the available remedies. There are also many occasions when both the implied condition and also the implied condition of merchantable quality will apply. According to David Jones Ltd v Willis, Willis asked for a pair of walking shoes that must fit comfortably over a bunion on her foot but on the third occasion which she used the shoes, one of the heels collapsed. Therefore, Willis sued for the shoes of unmerchantable quality and unfit for purpose as specified by Mrs Willis. In Christabel's case, she specifically asked for high quality recycled papers but Paper Supplies failed to deliver such goods. As Paper has breached all these explicit and implicit terms, the only defence possible is related to the exclusion clause mentioned earlier. ...read more.

Conclusion

This however is short lived as Paper sent Friends a letter, with an account enclosed, stating that is intends to rely on the document signed by Christabel at the time of delivery. The agreement offered by Dee to Christabel is not contractual by nature but it is more of a promise. Christabel can argue on promissory estoppel. Following Central London Property Trust Ltd v High Trees House Ltd, the plaintiff agreed to reduce the rent and did not try to claim back the rent. If he did, it would be rejected as the plaintiff would have been estopped from claiming back the rent. Ditto, Christabel can argue that they have an agreement that payment on this delivery will not be enforced and if Paper does do so, they will be estopped from claiming it. For Christabel to rely on the promissory estoppel rule, she will have to prove all four elements of promissory estoppel which is the assumption, the promisor was responsible for the assumption, the reliance and the detriment. In this case, Dee and Christabel have a legal relationship and Dee as the representative of Paper made assumptions of not collecting the payment of the delivery. In reliance, Christabel acted on the faith of the assumption and manage to calm down the unsatisfied clients and she will suffer detriment if Dee reneges on the promise. In conclusion, Christabel's claims for damages and breach of warranty will most likely be approved based on facts and cases given above. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Law of Contract section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Law of Contract essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Contract Law - Offer And Acceptance

    3 star(s)

    The revocation is valid. But the offeree failed to read mail, telex, fax that sent during office hours - effective withdrawal Operation Of Law A. Death * Death of either party terminates the contract as the party no longer can breach an agreement * Death of offeror terminates the offer,

  2. Marked by a teacher

    Billy Joel Business Ethics and Law Case Study. In the above case ...

    3 star(s)

    He stinks!" Billy takes his violins to a music store to sell them and discovers they are only worth $2,000 and that they are not Stradivarius and Guarnerius violins but are instead counterfeits. He wants to countersue the salesman and asks you on what basis can he do so.

  1. Marked by a teacher

    In this Assignment I am going to describe the requirements of a valid contract ...

    3 star(s)

    Any material used or goods supplied in providing the service must be of satisfactory quality. The Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that requires traders to provide services to a proper standard of workmanship.

  2. Four ways in which a contract may be discharged.

    5. REMEDIES FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT. The innocent party will always have the right to sue for damages for breach of contract. Depending upon the nature of the breach i.e. the seriousness of it, they may also be able to repudiate the contract. If a condition is broken then the remedies available are damages and/or repudiation.

  1. Undue influence in the case of Barclays Bank v. O''Brian [1994] Lord Browne-Wilkinson was ...

    Court of Appeal in: Royal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2) [1998] REMEDIES The remedy in cases of undue influence is rescission. Damages are not available, but see below. RESCISSION Where rescission is ordered, the whole transaction will be set aside.

  2. Free essay

    Outline how consumers are protected in contracts for the sale of goods, identifying relevant ...

    The remedies for these terms would be similar to those under the rest of the act. Remedies Pass (P5) If the terms of a contract are breached by one party, the other may suffer a loss. Where this occurs, there are various remedies which the party suffering from the other's breach can use.

  1. LAW OF CONTRACT. LAW 103. THE CONTENT OF THE CONTRACT.

    The defendant withheld rent claiming he was entitled to so do because of the landlord's breach of contract 2. DISTINGUISHING TERMS FROM REPRESENTATIONS. "A representation is a statement of fact made by one party to the contract (the representor) to the other (the representee)

  2. I have been asked to advise a client on considering contracting with a building ...

    Consideration must move from the promise but not necessarily to the promisor. 3. Consideration must be sufficient though not necessarily adequate. This means that the consideration need not be of equal value to the parties to the contract, but it must be of some value to the parties involved, but does have to be financial.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work