Business Law HA2022 Report: Contract and Negligence Case Problems

This report, prepared for the HA2022 Business Law course at Holmes Institute, addresses two case problem questions focusing on contract law and negligence. The analysis employs the IRAC (Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion) method to evaluate the legal aspects of each scenario. The first part of the report examines the formation of a valid contract, specifically addressing offer, acceptance, and consideration, and determines whether a party can refuse to pay based on the principles of contract law. The second part delves into the law of torts, focusing on negligence. It assesses whether a football club or local council can be sued for negligence, examining the elements of duty of care, breach, and causation, and considers potential defenses such as contributory negligence and volenti non fit injuria. The report concludes with a determination of liability and potential outcomes based on the application of relevant legal principles and case precedents.

Running Head: BUSINESS AND CORPORATION LAW 0
Business Law
HA2022
9/25/2019
Student Name

HA2022 1
Executive Summary
Contract Law consist many of the aspect in itself and has many essential elements.
Whenever it comes to check the rights and liabilities of parties, first it becomes
necessary to check that whether a contract been developed between them or not. The
report presented herewith carries two questions out of which one is related to contract
law and another one is related to negligence. Negligence is a kind of Tort that held the
people liable who do civil wrongs to others or fails to fulfill their duty of care. Both of the
questions have done using IRAC format.

HA2022 2
Contents
Executive Summary...........................................................................................................1
Part A.................................................................................................................................3
Issue...............................................................................................................................3
Rules...............................................................................................................................3
Application......................................................................................................................4
Conclusion......................................................................................................................4
Part B.................................................................................................................................4
Issue...............................................................................................................................4
Rules...............................................................................................................................4
Application......................................................................................................................6
Conclusion......................................................................................................................6
References.........................................................................................................................7

HA2022 3
Part A
Issue
Whether Grant can refuse to pay $400 or not.
Rules
Parties of a contract owe certain rights and obligations to each other and therefore
whenever it comes to such entitlement and responsibilities it becomes necessary to
check whether a contract exists between the parties or not. To form a valid contract,
certain elements need to be there which are essential of contract. If any of such
elements seem to be missing then a contract cannot assume to be there. Starting the
discussion regarding these elements, this is to mention that offer comes in the first
place. As the name implies, an offer is a promise made by one party to another in which
he/she propose to do something or to refrain by doing the same and expect some
promise in return. An offer is required to be certain and to communicate to a specific
person to whom it was intended to make. Similar to an offer, another term is also there
under contract law that looks similar to offer but is not in actual. The term is known as
an invitation to treat where a party calls invitation for offers. It is generally addressed to
many people who after knowing such invitation makes an offer against the same. It
means a party receives offers in reply to an invitation to treat. Under the decision of
various cases, different communications have concluded as an invitation to treat. For
instance in the case titled Partridge v Critenden (1968) 2 All ER 425 it was given that an
advertisement should be considered as an invitation to treat (MacIntyre, 2018). The
nature of the offer and invitation to treat is different from one another. Offer is used to
make to one identified party whereas in general invitation to treat to many. Secondly,
terms of the offer are well defined and certain whereas terms of the invitation to treat
are less defined. An invitation to treat just shows an intention to enter into a contract in
the future.
The next important element is consent. To form an agreement, a party to whom the
offer is made is required to provide consent for the same. If such a person provides
his/her consent making changes into original terms of offer then it is known as a
counteroffer and not the acceptance. Hence, to states that for a valid consent the same
is required to be certain. Another important condition associated with acceptance is
communication. It means only making of consent is not enough but the same must be
communicated also. It was given in the case of Entorres v Miles Far East [1955] 2 QB
327, that offeror is required to receive consent before it is effective. In general,
acceptance seems to be communicated at the incident where it comes into the
knowledge of offeror but there is an exception of this rule. In those cases where parties
adopt the postal rule of communication, then rules related to acceptance are different.
In such cases, a consent becomes effective when offeree drop the consent letter to the
postbox as decided in the case of Adams v Lindsell (1818) 106 ER 250. It means no
matter whether an offeror receives the acceptance letter or not, acceptance is
completed at the event of dropping the same into the mailbox (Holland and Webb,
2019).

HA2022 4
Felthouse v Bindley [1862] EWHC CP J35, is an important case where court denied to
consider silence as consent. The offeree can also give his/her consent to the offer
made by offeror through conduct. Further, some other elements are also essential for
the contract. These conducts include the capacity of the parties to enter into a contract,
intention of the parties to create a legal relationship with each other and valud
consideration (Australiancontractlaw.com, 2019).
Application
In the case presented hereby, an insurance company made an advertisement where it
made an invitation to the public to subscribe for shares. It was an invitation to treat
where offers were expected to receive from public and the same was addressed to
more than one unidentified persons. Further, it was an advertisement and applying the
decision of Partridge v Critenden, was an invitation to treat. In response to this
invitation, offers were required to be made. A person named Grant made an offer where
he applied for 100 shares of the subjective company. The offer seems to be valid as it
contained clear terms with respect to subject matter and consideration. Now, the
insurance company was required to accept the offer and to communicate to Grant. The
company accepted the offer made by Grant and posted the allotment letter through the
mail. The issue of the case was that Grant has never received this letter. Here this is to
state that postal rules of communication were applied. Applying the decision of Adams v
Lindsell, acceptance, in this case, has completed at the very moment when the
allotment letter was dropped to the postbox by insurance company. Here the fact that
Grant had not received the subjective letter does not take any matter.
In conjunction with this, other elements of the contract were also existed such as
consideration, the intention of the parties to create legal relations and capacity of the
parties. In this manner, a valid contract existed between the insurance company and
Grant and the insurance company had rights and responsibilities to each other.
Conclusion
Conclusively this is to state that a valid contract existed between the parties. Company
has chosen a postal mode of communication and in this manner; acceptance was
validly communicated to Grant. Now, Grant cannot refuse to pay $400, in against of call
on share because it is his obligation to do under a contract made with the insurance
company.
Part B
Issue
Whether Frank can sue the football club or local council? Whether such council or club
can use any defense and if yes then whether they will be successful?
Rules
In those situations where one person does some civil wrong to others then such other
person can make a claim against the defaulted person. Under common law, provisions
related to civil wrongs are covered under Tort Law. One of the significant kinds of Tort is
negligence. It is a situation where a person who owes a duty of care to other breaches

HA2022 5
the same. A person seems to held liable for negligence where he/she owes a standard
of care to other and breaches the same. To amount to a successful claim of negligence,
some factors need to be there which are mentioned as below:-
Duty of care: - The very first element states that there must be a standard of care
at the part of defendant. Under the duty of care, a person who owes the same is
required to behave responsibly and reasonably in respect to others to whom
such duty is owed.
Breach: - The second condition states that the defendant must breach the
standard of care that owe to claimant.
Loss: - The third essential of negligence states that due to breach of duty of care,
the claimant must suffer from a loss. Such loss can arise in any form such as
economic loss, physical injury, or mental harm.
Relationship between loss and negligence: - this is the last but very important
element of negligence. It is required that the loss happened to a claimant must
be a direct result of negligence done by the defendant (Griffithslawpc.com,
2019).
If all the above-mentioned elements present in a case then the claimant may initiate a
claim of negligence and can be successful in his/her claim. Such duty of care exists in
many cases considering nature of relationship between the parties. Principles of
negligence are important in every sector. In sport also different parties such as a
competitor, organizers, the owner owe a duty of care to various other parties. In the
case of Langham v Connell Point Rovers Soccer Club [2005] NSWCA 461,
occupiers/organizers held liable for negligence and decided that these parties owe a
duty of care to Spectators (Davies, 2012).
Further, the case of Haris v Bulldogs Rugby League Club [2006] NSWCA 53 is also
related to sports negligence where it was decided that occupiers/organizers owed a
duty of care to Spectators but cannot be held liable as they have taken reasonable
steps to prevent loss happened to the claimant.
Under negligence, many defenses are there that can be claimed by defenses, which are
mentioned as below:-
Contributory negligence: - Those situations where in addition to the defendant,
claimant also acts negligently, this defense can be raised this defense. This
defense reduces the level of damages that can be claimed by the claimant.
Volenti nonfit injuria: - This defense can be used in those situations where
claimant accepts the risk of even being aware of the same. In such a situation,
defendant may raise the claim of Volenti non fit injuria/ voluntary assumption of
risk and cannot be held liable to pay damages (Oliphant and Nolan, 2017).
Exclusion of liability:- It is a case where defendant excludes his/her liability and
therefore cannot be held liable.
Ex turpi causa:- If the conduct involved in question is illegal then also the
defendant has no responsibility to claimant and can raise the defense of Ex turpi
causa.

HA2022 6
Application
In the case provided hereby, Frank is the claimant of the case who went to watch a
football game. During one of the match, the football was kicked into the stand and made
Frank injured. To apply the provisions of negligence in this situation, this is to state that
all the elements of negligence seem to exist. Firstly, the football club and council owed
a duty of care. They were required to behave in a responsible manner in respect to the
Spectators of the match as establish in the case of Langham v Connell Point Rovers
Soccer Club. In this manner, they need to take care of the height of stand where visitors
of Spectators used to sit and to ensure that football does not have access to such
stands as it could be injurious. Council owed the ground and football club approved the
same for matched hence needed to take care of it but failed to do so. Since they have
not made sure about it and let the stand unsafe, they have breached their duty of care.
The third essential of negligence i.e. loss to the claimant was also satisfied since Frank
his arm broke. If to check the last essential of negligence i.e. relationship of loss and
negligence this is to state that the same seems to be satisfied because the only reason
of injury occurred to Frank was the negligence done by council and club. If to apply the
decision of the case of Langham v Connell Point Rovers Soccer Club and Haris v
Bulldogs Rugby League Club, council and club will be held liable as they failed to take
necessary steps to prevent the injury occurred to Frank.
Moving the focus towards defenses available to council and club, this is to state that
defense of volenti nonfit injuria can be applied here since it is mentioned that Frank
used to attend the match on the same ground regularly. Hence, in such a situation he
can assume to have knowledge of risk associated with sitting at a particular stand
where the accident happened. Even being aware of this he chosen to sit there and
hence the defense of voluntary assumption of risk can be taken by council and club.
Conclusion
Frank can sue the club and council for the negligence conducted by them. They can ask
defense of voluntary assumption of risk and they would succeed in the same.

HA2022 7
References
Adams v Lindsell (1818) 106 ER 250
Australiancontractlaw.com. (2019) Formation. [online] Available from:
https://www.australiancontractlaw.com/law/formation.html [Accessed on 17/09/2019]
Davies, C. (2012) Negligence And Risk Management And Sport. [online] Available from:
https://researchonline.jcu.edu.au/25604/1/25604_Davies_2012.pdf [Accessed on
25/09/2019]
Entorres v Miles Far East [1955] 2 QB 327
Griffithslawpc.com. (2019) 4 Elements of a Negligence Claim (and more). [online]
Available from: https://www.griffithslawpc.com/resources/elements-negligence-claim/
[Accessed on 25/09/2019]
Haris v Bulldogs Rugby League Club [2006] NSWCA 53
Holland, J., and Webb, J. (2019). Learning Legal Rules: A Students' Guide to Legal
Method and Reasoning. Australia: Oxford University Press.
Langham v Connell Point Rovers Soccer Club [2005] NSWCA 461
MacIntyre, E. (2018) Business Law. UK: Pearson UK.
Oliphant, K. and Nolan, D. (2017) Tort Law: Text and Materials. UK: Oxford University
Press.
Partridge v Critenden (1968) 2 All ER 425