Business Law

Running head: BUSINESS LAW 1
Business Law
Name
Institution

BUSINESS LAW 2
Question 1
i) John, a lawyer in a trial, accused Paul (a witness in that trial) of being a thief
while Paul was on the witness stand. Can Paul sue John? Explain using legal terminology
During trial, a lawyer is permitted by the court to ask unlimited questions especially
during cross-examination in order to establish the credibility of a witness. Whenever the trial
lawyer finds something that can make the credibility of a witness questionable, then they
bring the issue to the attention of the court. Therefore, Paul cannot sue John who actually is
performing his duties to the court, by accusing Paul to be a thief; the trial lawyer is only
trying to establish the credibility of the witness.
ii) Later that day John repeated the same statement about Paul outside of the
courtroom. Can Paul sue John? For what specifically? Explain.
Yes. Paul can sue John in this case; the moment John repeated the same statement outside
court then he is liable for slander. The statement is considered slanderous since it injures the
reputation of Paul especially when nothing about the same has been proved. Therefore, Paul
has every right to sue John for slander before a legal court of law (Baker, 2011).
iii) What if John actually has evidence that Paul was convicted of theft? Explain the
legal implications for situation "ii”
In the event that John has evidence about what he is claiming then this statement would
not be considered slanderous since it will be the truth about Paul. In that case, Paul cannot
sue John for slander if John has evidence that supports his claims before a court of law.

BUSINESS LAW 3
Question 2
Sam a salesman said to Joe, "This washing machine is as good as other well-known
brands." Joe bought the washing machine (for use at home) but is not satisfied with it
and wished to sue Sam for fraud.
- Explain the legal implications of fraud and misrepresentation in the UAE (including
the relevant statute number and year)
Misrepresentation in the UAE is administrated by Federal Law No. 5 of 1985 in respect of
the Civil Transactions Law (Civil Code).
According to UEA as expressed in article 185 Misrepresentation is defined as situation
where one of the contracting parties uses fraudulent means to deceive the other party into
consenting to something they would have not consented to under normal circumstances
(Wadlow, 2011).
Article 187 of the civil code under UEA laws highlights the legal consequences of
misrepresentation;
The party mislead in a contract has a right to cancel the contract. The civil code under the
UEA laws views misrepresentation as a defect to consent of contracting parties hence the
aggrieved party can cancel the contract (Macdonald, Atkins, & Krebs, 2018).
Misrepresentation under the UAE laws serves as ground for termination. However,
misrepresentation as per the UAE laws on its own is not ground for compensation for the
aggrieved party as it is not considered as breach of contract.