Assignment 1: Provide Legal Advice
Letter 1
Dear Bob
The question on whether Sam is entitled to sell the book depends on whether there was a contract between you and Sam. A contract is an agreement that is recognized by law (Willes, 2009). An agreement must contain five vital elements so as it can be considered a contract. The first element that defines a contract is the intention of the involved parties to create a legal relationship. The parties to the agreement must be willing to do particular things in exchange for the promise of the other party to do things of a particular nature . The second element that defines a contract is the offer. An offer is a promise made by one party with the intention of creating a legal relationship. The person making an offer pledges to do something so as the other party can do or give something else in return. The offer or the promise must be conveyed by offeror to the other party.
The third element of a contract is acceptance. The person being given the promise must accept whatever is promised and agree to give what offeror expects in return (Elliot & Quinn, 2011). The offeree must also communicate the acceptance of the offer to offeror. Offeror is not bound by the contract until the communicated promise is accepted. The fourth element of a contract is the consideration. A consideration is what the offeree is expected to give on acceptance of offeror’s promise. For instance, if offered goods, the offeree may give money in exchange. In this case, the money is the consideration. The fifth element of a contract is the capacity to contract (Atiyah, 1989). The parties entered into the contract must be legally permitted to enter into contracts. For instance, a person under the age of 18 years is not legally permitted to enter into a contract.
In this particular case, we focus on determining whether a contract is made when goods are displayed for sale in a self-serve establishment. This issue was decided in the British court where the court ruled that display of goods in a self-serve store cannot be considered an offer to sell but only as an invitation for the public to examine the goods . The transaction can only be considered a contract when the purchaser makes an offer to purchase at the counter, and the offer is received by the seller. Therefore, Sam is entitled to refuse to sell the book since he did not accept the offer to purchase. Similarly, the display of the book on the shelf cannot be considered an intention to create a legal relationship.
Letter 2
Dear Barry
The question on whether the council is entitled to rely on the clause on the ticket depends on the terms in the leasing contract. Terms refer to the content of a given a contract (Weitzenbock, 2012). The terms stipulate the duties of each party under a given contract. The main terms in any business contract are the subject matter and the price paid. Contract terms can either be expressed or implied. Expressed terms are formulated by both parties. Expressed terms can be wholly oral, partly oral and partly written, or wholly written.
Implied terms are read by the court based on the type of contract and intentions of the parties or on the basis of law (Elliot & Quinn, 2011). Terms may be implied by facts, law, custom, and trade usage. Terms implied by facts are assumed when the courts deems that the term would have been included in the contract if the parties had thought of the issue. There are also terms that the law demands to be present in certain types of contract. These terms are implied by law. Terms can also be implied by custom where there is evidence that the terms would be present under local customers. Terms can also be implied if they are commonly used in a particular trade.
The attendant may argue that the clause on the ticket is a term of the contract because of the importance of the statement. Terms that are deemed vital to an agreement are referred to as conditions. He may argue that Barry must have read the clause and accepted to hire the chair with this condition. However, the council is not entitled to rely on the clause because there is a term implied by laws in all leasing contracts that the landlord must take sensible care to keep common parts of his property in good shape. Though there is no agreement between Barry and the landlord that requires the landlord to maintain his property, the law demands that the landlord keeps his property in a good condition.
Letter 3
Dear Brian
The question on whether you are entitled to claim the reward depends on whether there was a contractual obligation between you and Adam, the advertiser (Elliot & Quinn, 2011). A contractual obligation is only created when the offeree agrees to and accepts the promise or offer made by offeror. However, reward is a special type of contract since there is no discussion between offeror and the offeree. Consequently, reward contracts fall under the category of unilateral contracts. Where reward contracts are involved, the offeree can only be considered to have accepted the offer when he or she performs the act that is required by offeror.
For instance, if the police department offers a reward for the capture of a criminal, the department is not legally bound to anyone who claims to accept the offer (Atiyah, 1989). The offer only becomes legally binding when a person delivers the criminal to the police station. Therefore, Brain is not entitled to claim the rewards since he had not completed the tasks by the time the reward was being withdrawn. Therefore, the law presumes that there was no contract between Brain and Adam since the offer was not accepted by the completion of the task. Since Brian had not completed the task when the reward was withdrawn, the contract was not complete hence Brain is not entitled to claim the reward.
However, Brian is entitled to pursue compensation under tort liability law. Torts are unfair acts that result in harm or damage to another person. Contractual liabilities arise when there is a breach of agreement between parties (Elliot & Quinn, 2011). However, tort liability can be instituted against anyone regardless of whether there is a voluntarily binding agreement. Unlike contractual liability, tort liabilities are as a result of law rather than as a result of an agreement. Brian may argue that it was unfair for Adam to withdraw the reward after Brain had committed a lot of resources and time in accomplishing the task. Under British Law, tort liabilities are excluded in cases where the application of contractual liabilities is fulfilled under the principle of non-accumulation of tort and contractual liabilities.
Assignment Number 2: Evaluation Task
Statement A
It is not true that Neil does not owe Roger a non-delegable duty of care as an employer to afford a secure and protected working environment. Non-delegable duty is a responsibility that cannot be transferred to somebody else (Hodgson & Lewthwaite, 2007)…
VIEW FULL ASSIGNMENT
To view and download the full assignment, purchase the assignment below: