Business and Corporations Law Research Paper (Student Details: )
15 Pages3879 Words268 Views
Added on 2020-03-02
About This Document
ASSESSMENT 2 15 rmit university 2017 Business and Corporations Law Research Assignment (Student Details: ) [Type the company address] Contents Question 1 3 Issue 3 Rule 3 Application 4 Conclusion 5 Question 2 6 Issue 6 Rule 6 Application 7 Conclusion 8 Question 3 9 Issue 9 Rule 9 Application 13 Conclusion 13 Bibliography 14 A. Thirdly, the individual who made a promise is stopped from making a u-turn on such promise, particularly where the second party made reliance over the promise
Business and Corporations Law Research Paper (Student Details: )
Added on 2020-03-02
ShareRelated Documents
rmit university
ASSESSMENT 22ContentsQuestion 1..........................................................................................................................3Issue...............................................................................................................................3Rule................................................................................................................................3Application......................................................................................................................4Conclusion......................................................................................................................5Question 2..........................................................................................................................6Issue...............................................................................................................................6Rule................................................................................................................................6Application......................................................................................................................7Conclusion......................................................................................................................8Question 3..........................................................................................................................9Issue...............................................................................................................................9Rule................................................................................................................................9Application....................................................................................................................13Conclusion...................................................................................................................13Bibliography.....................................................................................................................14A.Articles/ Books/ Reports........................................................................................14B.Cases.....................................................................................................................14C. Legislations............................................................................................................15D. Others....................................................................................................................15
ASSESSMENT 23Question 1IssueThe key issue in this case relates to the success of Ringo in recovering the amount of $6,000 as rent in arrear from Elena. RuleUnder the contract law, there are certain vitiating factors which make the contractvoid or voidable at the option of the aggrieved party. One of such vitiating factors is misrepresentation. Under misrepresentation, one of the parties is induced into formationof the contract by making a false statement of fact. Upon successfully establishing a case of misrepresentation, the aggrieved party can get the contract rescinded1. Smith v Land and House Property Corp2 was a case where a hotel was bought by the claimant and the seller described a tenant as “the most desirable”. The statement was made by the claimant where he had clear knowledge that the rent of this tenant was unpaid and the tenant could be declared as bankrupt at any moment. It was held by the court that a case of misrepresentation was present here as the statement was one of fact and not ofopinion. This was because the seller held a position where he knew these facts. The difference between a statement of fact and statement of opinion can be clarified with the case of Bisset v Wilkinson3. The respondent had made a statement in this regarding the possibility of the land holding 2,000 sheep. Making reliance on the statement made, claimant purchased the land and upon the estimate being proven wrong, a claim for misrepresentation was made before the court of law. It was held by the court that the statement made here was a statement of opinion and not of fact. Due to this reason, the claim of misrepresentation failed. Similarly, in Car & Universal Credit v Caldwell4, due to the fraudulent misrepresentation being established before the court of law, the contract was permitted to be rescinded by Caldwell. 1Linda Mulcahy, Contract Law in Perspective (Routledge, 5th ed, 2008)2(1884) 28 Ch D 73[1927] AC 1774[1964] 2 WLR 600
ASSESSMENT 24Amongst the different major concepts in contract law, is the concept of promissory estoppel. Under this concept, the individual who made a promise is stopped from making a u-turn on such promise, particularly where the second party made reliance over the promise made. So, once a promise is made, a person is estopped from going back on this promise, particularly when the same is not supported by consideration5. The first requirement to establish a case of promissory estoppel is to show that a contract was in existence. Secondly, the obligation covered under this contract is modified. Thirdly, the promise was clear and unambiguous, which led to a change in the position of the parties. Lastly, if the promisor is allowed to go back, it would be unfair for the party who relied upon the made promise6. In the High Trees case7, the promissory estoppel as a concept was brought forward through the obiter statement made by Lord Denning. The case revolved around the rent of block of flats given to the defendant by the plaintiff for ground rent of £2,500. Due to the defendant facing hardships as a result of the Second World War, it was decided between the parties to bring down the rent by half. Upon the war being over, the plaintiff asked for the original rent to be reinstated. The court agreed with the point raised by the plaintiff. Lord Denning did not stop the ruling here and made the obiter statement where he stated that had the plaintiff asked for the payment of the reduced rent, for the war period, they would have not succeeded. The rationale behind this was the reliance of the defendant on the promise which changed their positions, and ultimately, the concept of promissory estoppel came into being8. ApplicationThe facts of the case highlight both the issues mentioned in the Rules segment. The case study clearly shows that Ringo had approached Elena in order to see her interest in the prime location store being offered by him. For inducing her into entering the lease for his store, Ringo told Elena that a number of brands had signed up long term leases and that high end fashion shops would be opened up along with the 5 Brian A. Blum, Contracts: Examples & Explanations (Aspen Publishers Online, 4th ed, 2007)6 Jeffrey A. Helewitz, Basic Contract Law for Paralegals (Aspen Publishers Online, 5th ed, 2007)7Central London Property Trust Ltd v High Trees House Ltd [1947] KB 1308 Jill Poole, Casebook on Contract Law (Oxford University Press, 13th ed, 2016)
End of preview
Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.
Related Documents
Making a Contract - Analysis and Application of Common Law of Contractlg...
|12
|2027
|449
Business Law Legal Issue - Assignmentlg...
|9
|2356
|138
Business Law Crown Melbourne Limitedlg...
|6
|1380
|110
Business and Corporation Law: Assignmentlg...
|7
|1337
|35
Business Law: Misrepresentation and Negligence Caseslg...
|9
|2325
|477
Negligent Misstatement Assignmentlg...
|6
|1042
|129