• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. 9
  10. 10
  11. 11
  12. 12
  13. 13
  14. 14

Business Law Assignment. Find the case of Archbolds (Freightage) Ltd. v S. Spanglett Ltd. Randall [1961] 1 QB 374 and answer the questions set out below

Extracts from this document...


´╗┐Coursework N1 in Business Law ________________ Introduction to Business Law 2010/2011 Coursework Assignment 1 1. Find the case of Archbolds (Freightage) Ltd. v S. Spanglett Ltd. Randall [1961] 1 QB 374 and answer the questions set out below. a) Which court made this decision? (1 mark) - The decision was made by the Court of Appeal. b) Name the judges who decided this case. (3 marks) - Lord Justice Pearce, Lord Justice Sellers and Lord Justice Devlin were the judges who made the decision. c) On what date was this case heard? (1 mark) - The case was heard in 1960 year, on the dates December 15, November 7, November 8, and November 4 d) What was S. Spanglett Ltd?s business? (1 mark) - S. Spanglett Ltd was manufacturer of furniture in London. e) Briefly explain the key facts relating to Archbolds (Freightage) Ltd?s claim. (3 marks) The key facts are that Archbolds (Freightage) Ltd?s were manufacturing company which owned driving license category C which does not allowed them to transport the others goods for payment. f) Why did S Spanglett Ltd say they were not liable to Archbolds (Freightage) Ltd ? (1 mark)[1] - The defendants stated that they are not liable to the plaintiff for few reasons: 1. ...read more.


Find the Consumer Protection (Distance Selling) Regulations 2000 a) What is the statutory instrument number for these Regulations? (1 mark) - The statutory instrument number for the Consumer Protection (Distance Selling) Regulations is 2000 No. 2334. b) On what date did these Regulations come into force? (1 mark) - October, 31, 2000 c) Which Act and which statutory instrument were amended by these Regulations? (2 marks)[5] The Act which was amended is Unsolicited Goods and Services Act 1971, and the statutory instrument that was amended was Unsolicited Goods and Services (Northern Ireland) Order 1976 d) Which EC Directive did the Regulations aim to implement? (give the full name and number)[6] (1 mark) Directive 97/7/ EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 20 May 1997 on the protection of consumers in respect of distance contract ? Statement by the Council and the Parliament. e) According to the Regulations, what is inertia selling? (1 mark)[7] Inertia selling is when: - Unsolicited goods are sent to the recipient with a view to his acquiring them. - The recipient has no reasonable cause to believe that they were sent with a view to their being acquired for the purpose of a business - And the recipient has neither agreed to acquire nor agreed to return them f) ...read more.


(1 mark) 1. Lord Clyde used the literal rule for deciding the case ii. Describe that rule of statutory interpretation in your own words. (1 mark) -The literal rule is that rule in which the words of the statute are provided in their real ordinary and simple meaning. The judges don?t use phrases which aim to sense of the statute. iii. Explain how Lord Clyde referred to the impact of EU law and what effect this had on his decision. (2 marks)[10] ?Mr. Sales referred to the three European Directives on the approximation of the laws of member states relating to insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles. These are the First Council Directive (72/166/EEC of 24 April 1972), the Second Council Directive (84/5/EEC of 30 December 1983), and the Third Council Directive (90/232/EEC of 14 May 1990).? iv. Name two other rules of statutory interpretation and provide a brief description or explanation of each one. (4 marks)[11] 1. Golden rule 1. The Golden rule is the opposite of the Literal rule and means that judges can shift their words from their real or ordinary meaning if it is necessary. 1. Mischief rule 1. Courts use this rule to establish the intention of the legislator. The idea of the Mischief rule is to discover mischief and defect in a statute and to apply a remedy for the same. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree Commercial Law 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 University Degree Commercial Law essays

  1. Introduction to Commercial Law. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of resolving a civil ...

    However, there may be a lack of openness as some tribunals are held in private which can lead to the suspicion about the fairness of the decision as reasons for the decisions are not always given. There is an unfair imbalance between represented and unrepresented parties when an individual who

  2. Limited liability

    The reliance on the courts to deal with this matter has been proven a rather costly and disorganized solution. Milman suggests that a possible solution would be to reverse the burden of proof so that parents will be liable, unless they can prove that there has been no meddling with

  1. Consumer Law - Effectiveness of guaratees

    that failed after five years - outside its three-year warranty - on the grounds that it had only done 60,000 miles and should have run for at least 80,000.19 So as a conclusion to my findings is a manufacturer's guarantee any worth at all, well yes and no depending on various factors.

  2. sale of goods act 1979

    After it was found that s14 (2) of the Sale of Goods Act in the Stevenson's case did not give rise to an implied term that Jelle was not of merchantable quality, the term "in the course of business" was to be broadly interpreted as a result the parliament intended to rectify s14 (2)

  1. To what extent is the rule contained in the Salomon v. Salomon & Co. ...

    However, the judge suggested that the company had a right of indemnity against Mr Salomon, declaring the shareholders of the company were nominees of Mr Salomon. The counter-claim was amended accordingly. Vaughan Williams J. declared that the plaintiffs of A.

  2. Both the common law and statute make it too easy for buyers to reject ...

    Currently, the markets in most countries are restricted by state laws, statutes, and even cultures. All consumers are equally faced with the same array of the power of suppliers. Individual consumers are relatively weak; they are individuals, while suppliers and manufacturers of goods and services these days more often than not a large corporations, even multi-national corporations.

  1. Consumers and the Law

    Here, the record of injury did not come under the purview of scientific and technical knowledge. The Judge did not hold the consumer for contributory negligence. He even did not make it evident which route had been chosen - strict liability, common law negligence or both.

  2. The key to section 13 of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 is interpretation.

    In this case the buyer relied on his own expertise and not on the term of the contract, thus the term of the contract was not important anymore. Nourse LJ established that the description must have a sufficient influence to become and essential term of the contract as the most important thing is reliance on that term.

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