logo

BLST2BSL - Introduction to Business Law and Ethics Assignment

   

Added on  2020-03-01

6 Pages1509 Words47 Views
1Cover SheetName of the studentSubject CodeWord Count

2ContentsIssues...........................................................................................................................................................3Applicable Law.............................................................................................................................................3Application of law........................................................................................................................................4Conclusion...................................................................................................................................................5Reference List..............................................................................................................................................6

3Issues1. Was it a term of the contract between Mikaela and Tower Flours that the almond flour wouldbe gluten free?2. Was there an implied term in Dan and Jacob’s contract with Mikaela, that their wedding cakewould be gluten-free?3. Was the icing colour a condition or a warranty of the contract? 4. Is Mikaela still responsible for the icing being the wrong colour on Kimiko’s cake? Applicable Law To make any valid contract, the main essential requirements are agreement (offer andacceptance), consideration, legal intention and the capacity (Lambiris & Griffin, 2017). Everyparty has an obligation to comply with the contract terms which are normally defined as expressand implied. (Carrrey BA, 1991)Express terms are desires of the parties which are made part of contract, either orally or inwritten form, before its incorporation and implied terms are followed by the parties undercustom, law, usage, etc and is held in Con-Stan Industries of Australia Pty Ltd v NorwichWinterthur (Australia) Ltd(1986) and Hawkins v Clayton(1988)).The written terms are binding upon the parties and is held in EllulandEllul v Oakes. (1972) andL'Estrange v F Graucob [1934]. When the parties intent to bind themselves by oral terms thensuch terms are considered as part of the written contract only when there is some collateralcontract to support the same and is held in JJ Savage v Blakney(1970). But if one party makes apuff or a simple representation then such terms are not binding upon the parties and are held inEllulandEllul case. (Clark J, 2013)However, no oral tern is binding if not part of the collared contract. It was held in Gordon vMacgregor- [1909] that the parties are not allowed to lay down any kind of evidence toauthenticate such oral statements. But, when the question of the sanctity of the contract, its scopeor nature or the exact intention of the parties or to judge the authenticity of the contract, then,oral terms can be relied upon (Codelfa Construction Pty Ltd v State Rail Authority of NSW

End of preview

Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.

Related Documents
BLST2BSL Introduction to Business Law
|9
|1805
|70

BLST2BSL - Principle of Oral Contract in Business Law assignment
|6
|1363
|144

BLST2BSL Introduction to Business Law And Ethics
|7
|1543
|112

Valid Contract Law : Assignment
|9
|2133
|47

Solution Issues in Kalpana-Rafia Contract
|11
|3002
|452

Sample Assignment on Contract Law (docs)
|5
|1099
|81