Determining Breach of Contract and Liability in Business Law

This document discusses scenarios in business law related to breach of contract and liability. It covers the essential elements of a valid contract and the consequences of breach. The scenarios include determining the ability to sue for breach of contract and the liability for costs incurred.

Running head: BUSINESS LAW
Business Law
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1BUSINESS LAW
Activity 3
Scenario 1
To determine whether Hi-Tech would be able to sue Flagship Motel for breach of
contract.
An offer and acceptance is one of the most essential elements of a valid contract. An
offer is a sign of willingness that the offeror shows to the offeree for his acceptance for the
offer. However, an offer is different from an invitation to treat which involves an invitation to
many people at once so that they may counter-offer to that particular invitation for further
negotiation. An offer can be rejected by the offeree on the first instance when he receives it,
while the offeror can revoke his own offer too, just before the offeree shows his interest or
acceptance for it. On the other hand, an offeree can revoke his acceptance to an offer only till
the point it is received by the offeror as once it comes to the knowledge of the offeror it
cannot be cancelled, for it is stopped by the principle of Promissory Estoppel (Stone and
Devenney 2017).
In the give scenario, the Flagship Motel accepted the invitation of Hi-Tech for
purchasing 300 toasters at the rate of $57 each over an exchange of Faxes which was receive
and confirmed by Hi-tech. Therefore, after a proper exchange of offer and acceptance,
Flagship Motel would be allowed to revoke their acceptance and shall be liable to pay
damages if they breach.
Therefore, Hi-Tech would be able to sue Flagship Motel for breach of contract.
Scenario 2
To determine whether the hotel can charge the parents or Ben for the costs incurred.
A legally binding contract not only requires a proper exchange of offer and
acceptance along with a consideration, but also requires the parties to be have the capacity to

2BUSINESS LAW
enter into a contract. Any person who is aged above 18 years and not an insane or a bankrupt
can enter into a contract. In case an agreement is signed with a minor, the parents or the
guardian shall be held liable for any dispute. In addition, the parties must have an intention to
make it legally binding by executing the contract (McKendrick 2014).
In this case, Ben booked the hotel for hosting his 18th birthday, to which the hotel
confirmed and made all the necessary arrangement for the party including the food and extra
staff service. Here, it needs to be evaluated whether ben was 18 years old when he formed the
agreement with the hotel or he was still a minor. If he had turned 18 by the time the
agreement was formed, he shall be personally held liable for the breach of contract, as
otherwise his parents shall be held liable for Ben being a minor while contracting.
Therefore, the hotel can charge Ben only if he had attained the age of 18 when he
booked the hotel, or else his parents shall be made to pay the damages.

3BUSINESS LAW
Activity 4
To determine whether Julie is likely to succeed in her court case pertaining to the
negligence of Mike and Murray.
To establish a claim under the tort of negligence, it needs to be seen whether the
claims of the claimant satisfy the essential element of the tort of negligence. Donoghue v
Stevenson [1932] AC 562 is landmark case that discussed the elements to establish
negligence, which include: a) a duty of care of the defendant, b) a breach of such duty, c)
causation of damage specifically for that breach, d) foreseeability of the defendant to assume
the risk, and e) proximity between the claimant and the defendant which could make the
defendant liable for the condition of the claimant.
In this case, Mike and Murray being the baker hold certain duty of care to maintain a
good quality of the food products so that they do not have harmful effects on the buyers.
They should have checked the stale ingredient before using it and such failure to do so is a
breach of their duty of care causing harm to Julie and several other buyers. Such a
consequence was within their foreseeability.
Therefore, Mike and Murray shall be held liable for the medical cost of Julie.

4BUSINESS LAW
References
Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562
McKendrick, E., 2014. Contract law: text, cases, and materials. Oxford University Press
(UK).
Stone, R. and Devenney, J., 2017. The modern law of contract. Routledge.