Tort Law and Vicarious Liability

This assignment delves into the principles of tort law, focusing on negligence and vicarious liability. It presents scenarios involving shop employees, local councils, and personal injuries, requiring analysis of legal concepts like duty of care, breach of duty, causation, and contributory negligence. Students are tasked with applying these principles to specific situations and identifying potential liabilities.

Running head: CONTRACT AND TORT LAW
Contract and Tort Law
Name of the student
Name of the university
Author note

1
CONTRACT AND TORT LAW
Table of Contents
Task 1.1............................................................................................................................................2
Task 1.2............................................................................................................................................3
Task 1.3............................................................................................................................................4
Task 2.1............................................................................................................................................4
Task 2.2............................................................................................................................................5
Task 2.3............................................................................................................................................6
Task 3.1............................................................................................................................................7
Task 3.2............................................................................................................................................8
Task 3.3............................................................................................................................................8
Task 4.1............................................................................................................................................9
Task 4.2..........................................................................................................................................10
References......................................................................................................................................11

2
CONTRACT AND TORT LAW
Task 1.1
1. Offer and acceptance: offer and acceptance are the primary actions which are mandatory
for contract formation. A contract is legally binding agreement therefore only when the
parties to it want to bind each other. An offer has to be complete or else it is treated as an
invitation to the offer. An acceptance has to be made in accordance to the offer and has to
be communicated except in certain circumstances. These circumstances can be in case of
a unilateral contract as provided by the case of (Errington v Errington Woods , 1952).
2. A consideration is an act or omission which one party is willing to do in return of the
promise to be executed by the other party. A consideration has to be present in the
contract even if it is not fair or adequate. Without a consideration a contract cannot be
valid. An existing duty cannot be regarded as a consideration.
3. A contract is formed between two parties and the parties to the contract have to be
capable to enter into the contract. For the purpose of being capable a part must not be a
minor. However minors can enter into a few contracts such as that of necessity. A person
of unsound mind cannot enter into a contract when he in an unsound state. However
when the person is normal he has the capacity to enter into a contract. A contract without
capacity is void.
4. Consent in a contract has to be free. This means that the consent in relation to the contract
must not be obtained from any kind of misrepresentation, coercion, undue influence or
fraud. If the consent of a party is obtained through any of the above discussed ways the
contact is voidable on the part of the party whose consent has been obtained in an illegal
manner.

3
CONTRACT AND TORT LAW
Task 1.2
1. Bilateral contract- mostly contract are bilateral in nature and they are the most basic form
of contract. The contract requires an agreement between at least two people. This type of
contract requires an offer to be made to specific person or group and the acceptance off
which has to be duly communicated to the offeror. The example of a bilateral contract has
been provided in the case of (MP-Bilt Pte Ltd v Oey Widarto , 1999). A unilateral
contract on the other hand is different from the bilateral contract. The contract involves
actions which have to be undertaken by only one person or group. This form of contract
allows a single person or group to make an agreement or promise. One of the best
examples of a unilateral offer and acceptance has been provided in the case of ( Carlill v
Carbolic Smoke Ball Company , 1892)
2. In the assignment related to Macy, Diana and Christina a contract has been formed
between both Macy and Christina and Macy and Diana. The contract with Diana has been
formed according to the postal rule and the contract with Christina has been formed
normally through proper offer and acceptance. In this scenario both the parties to the
contract have the right to make a promise or agreement as provided by the words of the
offer made by Macy. Thus under the given circumstances it can be provided that bilateral
contract has been formed between Macy and Christina and Macy and Diana. The contract
which has been formed between Williams and Anson is also a bilateral contract as both
the parties are allowed to make an agreement or a promise In relation to the contract and
the contract required proper communication of offer and acceptance.

4
CONTRACT AND TORT LAW
Task 1.3
1. The most important term of the contract which forms its basis is known as a condition of
the contract. A condition is the primary term of the contract the breach of which gives the
other party to repudiate the contract and claim compensation for the loss suffered.
2. Warranties are not as important as the condition; however they are also terms of the
contract. a warranty is not directly related to the subject matter of the contact and if a
person breaches a warranty the other party would not have the right to repudiate the
contract. in case a warranty is breached the other party can only claim compensation.
3. Intermediate terms are terms which are decided by the court in accordance to its
seriousness and do not provide the party whose rights have been breached an automatic
right to repudiate the contract and claim compensation.
4. In scenario 1 the condition of the contract is the price which is to be paid by William to
Anson for the upgrade required for the gym machinery. There are no warranties or
intermediate terms in this scenario. In scenario 2 the condition is the computer to be sold
at a specific price. The warranties would have been any accessories related to the
computer. If there is a failure to provide the same computer or the agreed price the
condition would be breached.
Task 2.1
1. The negotiations and correspondences between the parties to a contract do not constitute
a legally binding agreement until all requires for the valid offer and acceptance has been
made. The offer has to be communicated to the parties as well as the acceptance and this
must have the intention to bind each other to the terms of the contract. a standard offer
has to be complete or else it would e considered as an invitation to a deal. An invitation

5
CONTRACT AND TORT LAW
to a deal can only invite an offer and cannot be accepted. Therefore only when the offer is
complete and it has been accepted in a proper way an agreement “meeting of minds” can
be formed.
2. The acceptance in relation to a valid offer cannot have any terms to it which were not
present in the original offer. The acceptance has to be unequivocal which means that it
has to be a mirror image of the terms which had been provided by the offer. Any
additional term would make the acceptance considered as a counter offer which would
defeat the existence of the original offer and it would not be available to be accepted
again unless it is an open offer. In the situation of Williams and Anson a valid offer was
not formed as the counter offer sent by Anson was not accepted by Williams. There were
no such problems in the case of Macy, Christina and Diana.
Task 2.2
1. In the given cases of Williams and Anson, Anson and Technology & Co, Macy and
Christina and Macy and Diana the terms of the contract are clear. In case of Williams and
Anson there was no contract formed as the prevail clause added to the offer of Williams
accounted to a counter offer. In Anson and Technology & Co the terms were to by the
parts at $1000 which were subjected to change. In case of Macy and Christina and Macy
and Diana the terms were to purchase the computer at $80 and $100 respectively.
2. Express terms in these cases are the terms which have been described in the contract.
They are terms which have been agreed upon on in a written or oral manner. There is no
confusion in relation to the existence of such terms such as the variation clause added by
Technology & Co with the contract with Anson and the sale of computer for the best
offer around the price of $100 as provided by Macy.

6
CONTRACT AND TORT LAW
3. Implied terms are those terms which are not agreed orally or in a written manner.
However these terms are so obvious that any reasonable person would assume that these
terms are present in the contract. However these terms cannot be incorporated if they are
fair or reasonable but only if they are necessary and obvious. In these situations the
implied terms would be to supply a good quality spare part and a working computer as it
is obvious for the other parties to know given the price.
Task 2.3
1. The terms which would have a profound effect in the given cases are that the computer is
available for sale at $100. The price is not fixed and therefore it is an invitation to an
offer. The significant term is that the best offer would be considered. In the offer made by
Christina is that the computer would be priced at $80. In the offer made by Diana the
profound term is that the computer would be brought at $100. The profound term is also
the sale of the specified computer by Macy.
2. The term which has a strong impact on any contract in any field is the price to be paid par
a particular good.
3. In some contract the expressed terms are not clear enough to determined the terms of the
contract however when the implied terms are associated with it the meaning of the
contract becomes clear as was in the case of (The Moorcock , 1889)
4. In this case a ship was parked in a dock and had suffered damages; the ship owner sued
the owner of the dock for the damages. The owner of the dock argued that it was not
written in the contract that in case of damages he would be liable. The court held that it is
an implied term as it is obvious that the dock owner would be liable for damages.

7
CONTRACT AND TORT LAW
Task 3.1
Liability for tort Contractual liability
According to the principles of occupier’s
liability any person who is injured on the
premises of other is entitled to a duty of care. If
the owner is not able to act as a reasonable
person would have in same situation the duty
of care is breached. A claim of negligence is
established if harm is caused due to the breach
and compensation is provided for the harm
caused.
Contractual is formed by a valid offer and
acceptance accompanied by a legal
consideration. The parties to the contract in this
case Grace and Harry with the grocery store
have to be communicated about the terms and
must have the intention to be bound by it.
In this case if the Nigel is found to be negligent
the claim for negligence can be made against
the grocery store as the action was done in the
course of employment according to vicarious
liability principles
The contract of Grace and Harry was with the
Grocery store and not with Nigel personally so
they can sue the store directly.
There is no necessity of having a contract with
the other party in case of negligence and a duty
of care is enough.
There must be contract between the parties to
claim contractual liability. In this case grace
and harry had the choice to accept or reject the
contract with the Grocery store.
In the case of negligence the damage is
provided to all the harm caused due to the act
thus the damages may exceed in this case to all
harm suffered by Harry and Grace which is
The damages in contract law are limited in
accordance to the parties and terms of the
contract.

8
CONTRACT AND TORT LAW
foreseeable excluding any contributory
negligence.
Task 3.2
In the given circumstances as provided by the case (Donoghue v Stevenson , 1932) there is
liability on the fair price store as they have a duty of care towards the customers. They have
stated an exclusion clause outside their store to limit their liability. However in case of an
exclusion clause the clause has to be brought to the attention of the other party before the
contract is formed which was not is this case as provided by (Causer v Browne , 1952). The
exclusion clause cannot be incorporated to evade a legal liability which is owed by the shop to
grace and harry as they have a duty of care towards them which have been violated and harm has
been caused. Thus grace can sue the store. However as harry voluntarily indulged in the harm
which reasonable person would have not his claim would not succeed because of contributory
negligence.
Task 3.3
1. A shop can be vicariously liable for the actions of the employees during the course of
employment as provided by (Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd , 2001). In this case as harry was
punched during the course of employment of Nigel, the shop would be liable vicariously.
2. As per the concept of vicarious liability which there is a principle agent relationship or
employer employee relationship in accordance to the rules of agency the actions of the
agents or the employees would be binding on the principle or employer when they have

9
CONTRACT AND TORT LAW
been done within the scope of employment even if the action is not within the scope of
their authority.
3. Yes, even if the principal or the employer is not the tort feasor they can be liable.
4. Yes, they NTUC did not act as reasonable persons by not cleaning the water and thus
breached the duty
5. Yes, as Nigel is the employee of the market and the action was done during the course of
employment NTUC would be liable.
Task 4.1
1. Yes the supermarket can use the defense of contributory negligence as it has been
provided by the case of (Froom v Butcher , 1976). According to the principles of this
concept if a person to whom an Injury has been caused has not acted as a reasonable
person in the situation which lead to the injury that is he did not take reasonable care to
avoid the injury the person can be held contributory negligent to the act. In such situation
the court determine the damages to be paid according to the extent contributory
negligence. Therefore as Harry was drunk and he himself tried to ski in the water it can
be used as a defense by the supermarket.
2. Yes grace can make a claim against the local council for the accident caused to her
because of the pavement as it is there duty to ensure that the pavement is safe for
walking. The local council can also use the defense of contributory negligence by stating
that Grace should have been more careful while walking.

10
CONTRACT AND TORT LAW
Task 4.2
1. Yes, as Nigel is the employee of the market and the action was done during the course of
employment NTUC would be liable.
2. No, the super market would not be liable for Harry’s slip as he was himself negligent
towards the injury and voluntarily brought the injury upon him.
3. No, the local council would not be liable for Harry’s injury as there is no connection
between Nigel and the local council to establish a principle servant relationship.
4. No, in the given case the local council cannot be held liable on the basis of vicarious
liability because of another person putting the stone on the street as there was no
relationship of that person with the local council. However it was the duty of local
council to ensure that no such accident takes place so they would be liable directly for
negligence.
5. The local council can also use the defense of contributory negligence by stating that
Harry should have been more careful while walking.

11
CONTRACT AND TORT LAW
References
Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company , EWCA Civ 1 (1892).
Causer v Browne , VLR 1 (1952).
Donoghue v Stevenson , AC 522 (1932).
Errington v Errington Woods , 1 KB 290 (1952).
Froom v Butcher , 1 QB 286 (1976).
Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd , 22 (UKHL 2001).
MP-Bilt Pte Ltd v Oey Widarto , 3 SLR 592 (1999).
The Moorcock , 14 PD 64 (1889).