logo

Business Laws | Question and Answers | Qantas and Airbus

   

Added on  2019-11-20

10 Pages2263 Words158 Views
Running head: BUSINESS LAWSBusiness LawsName of the studentName of the universityAuthor note

1BUSINESS LAWSQUESTION 1IssueThe main concern of discussion here is to determine the legal position of Qantas Airlines Ltd.(Qantas) on their contract with Airbus Corporation Ltd. (Airbus). RuleIt is essential to have a legitimate offer and the acceptance of the parties involved in order tomake a binding agreement, as in the case of Wakeling v Ripley.1It is needed of the parties involved to agree on the contractual terms in a similar way as with theother parties, as seen in the case of Riches v Hogben.2It is to be noted that once the contract papers and its terms are signed by the parties, the contractis legally bound, not changing when the said parties were unaware of the terms and conditionswritten on it, as noticed as stated in L’Estrange v Graucob 3 case.A party in the contract has the power to limit, meaning that its ‘Contractual Liabilities’ can beincluded in the ‘Exclusion Clause’. The same cannot be said the the case of ‘Legal Liabilities’though, lawed by Chapelton v Barry Urban District Council. It is not need that a bindingcontract to always be signed expressly, it’s validity is totally up to the agreement of the saidcontract in the first place.4 That’s what proves it valid, legally. 1 (1951) 51 SR (NSW) 1832 [1986] 1 Qd R 3153 (1923) 2KB 3944(1940) KB 532

2BUSINESS LAWSIt is necessary that any new contractual term that has never been used before by the parties benotified to the other parties immediately and brought into their attention in order for it to belegal, as shown in the case of Causer v Browne.5When a term of contract is not given into the awareness of the detriment party, then that contractis branded as legally invalid, as stated in the case of Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking Ltd.6A contract when formed always stays the same. The contracted when formulated and signedcannot be changed or modified in any way, as given in the case of Interphoto Picture Library vStiletto Visual Programmes Ltd.7If any breach of the contractual terms and conditions are broken, the parties can go forrepudiation of the said contract and claim any damages that were resulted by the breach in anypossible wayA ‘Warranty’ is a word that too belongs in the terminology, used to signify those contractualterms that do not, in any way authorize the releasing an aggrieved party from the liabilities of acontract by itself. They are said to be of less significance in a contract as they play no importantpart in the formation of its subject matter. Even if the warranties of a contract do not complywith the situation of the suffering party, the compensation for damage can be claimednevertheless in case if there is a breach. The principals of Damage, contract law empower the court of justice to bestow damages incompensations to the suffering party. It is expected of the court to pass absolute justice andrightful decisions, such that the compensation is enough for the aggrieved party to restore itsformer position if a violation or a breach in terms are noticed. The compensation is inclusive ofany loss that the party might have suffered due to the unforeseen damages caused by the breach5 (1952) VLR 16 (1971) 2 QB 1637 (1988) 2 WLR 615

End of preview

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

Related Documents
Business Law - Qantas Airlines Ltd
|10
|2240
|201

Contract Law Assignment : Qantas Airlines Ltd
|12
|2266
|391

Business Laws Issues | Assignment
|10
|2041
|145

LAW504 Business and Corporations Law
|9
|2143
|146

Law Assignment Australian Contracts & English Common Law
|12
|2556
|144

BUSINESS AND CORPORATION LAW.
|9
|2249
|152