logo

(Sample) Assignment on Business Law

   

Added on  2021-04-17

7 Pages1240 Words44 Views
Running Head: BUSINESS LAWBusiness LawName of the Student:Name of the University:Author Note

1BUSINESS LAWRichard and EmmaThe issue The issue in context is to determine whether Richard is eligible to get any damages fromEmma (Agent of Shocks Are Us)The relevant Law The law which needs to be applied in this situation is the law related to Misrepresentationin Contract. One of the significant cases in which rules related to Misrepresentation has beendiscussed in the case of Mutual Life & Citizens Assurance Co Ltd v Evatt (1968) 122 CLR 556.This case was related to a situation where misrepresentation had been made unintentionally butin a negligent way. The person who had made the misrepresentation had the opportunity to avoidit if he acted as a reasonable person towards handling the situation. The court in this case heldthat the defendant had been guilty for providing a wrong advice to the plaintiff which he couldhave avoided as a reasonable person and thus the defendant have to pay damages for the losssuffered by the plaintiff. The plaintiff was also allowed to rescind the contract. Application Through the application of the rules discussed in Mutual Life & Citizens Assurance CoLtd v Evatt in the present situation it can be stated that Emma has negligently misrepresented theuse of D200 shock absorbers to Richard. If she would have been careful as a reasonable personshe would know that D200 were not suitable for rough roads and Richard relied on such adviceto get into the contract. The jeep has suffered damages with $2000. Thus as Richard relined on

2BUSINESS LAWthe misrepresented facts to get into a contract for D200 and Emma could have avoided suchmisrepresentation, Richard as per the above discussed rule may get out of the contract and claimdamages for his loss.Conclusion Emma has negligently misrepresented facts to Richard so he is entitled to get out of thecontract and claim damages for his loss. Richard and George Issue The issue in context of the situation is that whether Richard can successfully defend aclaim from George for additional money. The Relevant LawThe relevant law applicable in the situation is related to rules of consideration andpromissory estoppels ConsiderationWhen a person partially pays the consideration of a contract in full settlement of the debtit is not a valid consideration. This is a well established principle in contract law which has beenfirst introduced by the Pinnel's Case (1602) 5 CoRep 117a case and then applied in the Stilk vMyrick [1809] EWHC KB J58 case. Promissory estoppels

End of preview

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

Related Documents
Business Law Assignment Sample PDF
|6
|1360
|163

(Solution) Contract Law : Assignment
|7
|1263
|90

Negligent Misstatement Assignment
|6
|1042
|129

Business Law Assignment : Emma
|7
|1297
|29

Business and Corporation Law: Assignment
|7
|1337
|35

(PDF) Business Law Assignment : Heller & Partners Ltd
|6
|1029
|76