logo

Business Law Assessment item 3 [Pick the date] Qantas Airlines

8 Pages2391 Words284 Views
   

Added on  2019-10-31

About This Document

However, if the term breached represents a warranty, then the innocent party cannot declare the contract as void and instead can only claim damages to the extent of the losses suffered due to the breach of warranty. However, if the term breached represents a warranty, then the innocent party cannot declare the contract as void and instead can only claim damages to the extent of the losses suffered due to the breach of warranty.

Business Law Assessment item 3 [Pick the date] Qantas Airlines

   Added on 2019-10-31

ShareRelated Documents
Business LawAssessment item 3[Pick the date]Student id
Business Law Assessment item 3 [Pick the date] Qantas Airlines_1
Question 1IssueThe key issue is to advice Qantas Airlines on the legal position with regards to the delivery of theair place with faulty entertainment software.LawDuring the negotiation of a contract, there are representations with regards to the products fromthe seller directed at the buyer. However, all these representations do not form part of thecontract. The ones which are considered important by either of the parties is drafted into thecontract and hence called the contractual terms. It is imperative that there must not be violationof the terms of the contract by either of the parties (Carter, 2012).The result of the violation of the term would be dependent on the fact whether the given term is acondition or a warranty. The conditions are typically those clauses which are so essential for thecontract that in the absence of these, one of the parties would not enter the contract only. As aresult, violation of any condition provides the right to the innocent party to declare the contractas void and also claim damages. This has been highlighted in the verdict of the Poussard vSpiers (1876) 1 QBD 410 case (Gibson & Fraser, 2014). However, if the term breachedrepresents a warranty, then the innocent party cannot declare the contract as void and instead canonly claim damages to the extent of the losses suffered due to the breach of warranty. This is inline with the verdict of the Bettini v Gye (1876) 1 QBD 183 case (Harvey, 2009).One of the ways to minimize the liability of a contractual party is through the insertion of anexclusion clause. This tends to either waive the complete liability or limit the same (Carter,2012). In order for this clause to be applicable, the following conditions would need to befulfilled.Communication of the clause before contract enactmentThe exclusion clause would be valid only when the clause has been brought to notice orcommunicated to the other party. In this regards, the party inserting the clause is expected to takereasonable efforts to put across the same to the other party irrespective of the fact whether theStudent name and id Page 1
Business Law Assessment item 3 [Pick the date] Qantas Airlines_2
other party takes notice of the same despite sincere efforts (Lindgren, 2011). The exclusionclause which are inserted after the enactment of contract are not considered as enforceable whichhas been made apparent in the decision given by the honorable court in Thornton v Shoe LaneParking [1971] 1 All ER 686 and Olley v Marlborough Court [1949] 1KB 532 case (Paterson,Robertson and Duke, 2015).Legality of the underlying clauseIt is pivotal that the concerned exclusion clause must not be used as a defense against anymisleading and deceptive conduct which is required so as to safeguard the interest of theconsumer (Davenport & Parker, 2014).Exclusion clause related to negligenceIn relation to potential negligent conduct it is necessary, that the party which inserts theexclusion clause regarding liability limitation or waiver in case of negligence must takereasonable measures to communicate to the other party that the clause has been inserted onlywith the intent of escaping or minimizing liability in case of negligence being exhibited(Gibson and Fraser, 2014).ApplicationBased on the given facts, it is apparent that there has been a contract between Airbus and Qantaswith regards to supply of the airplane which would lead to daily savings to the extent of$800,000. There were a number of terms included in the contract with one being that the in-flightvideo system would have 36 channels for the entertainment of the passengers. There were otherterms related to the engine and the distance that could be covered in a single flight. The planethat Airbus provided to Qantas had only 34 channels in the inflight video on account of softwareerror on account of confusion. Clearly, the number of in-flight video channels would be termedas a warranty as it is not so essential to the contract. As a result, Qantas can only claim damagesfrom Airbus since it is at fault for complying with the contractual term but cannot cancel thecontract. With regards to the quantum of liability, the exclusion clause which limits the liability of Airbusto $ 300,000 would not be applicable as during the contract negotiation or in the contract, thereStudent name and id Page 2
Business Law Assessment item 3 [Pick the date] Qantas Airlines_3

End of preview

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

Related Documents
Business Law | Qantas Airlines
|9
|1857
|50

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

Legal Issues and Law Relating to Exclusion Clause in Parking Ticket Case
|7
|1782
|44

Contractual Rights and Obligations - Assignment
|5
|1488
|85

LAW. [Date]. Question 1. Issue. The main issue is to de
|6
|1547
|42

Business Law Legal Analysis 2017
|13
|3450
|101