Case Study Analysis

Running head: CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author Note:

1
CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
ANSWER 1:
Part A:
Issues:
The issue involved in this case is that whether Tina is legally bound to buy the business
as a result of signing the Heads of Agreement.
Rules:
The rule involved in this case is given in the case of Masters v Cameron (1954) 91 CLR
353, High Court of Australia. As per the decision of this case by the High Court, signed
‘contract’ may be of three types; firstly, where the parties have agreed on the terms of the
contract and have intention to be bound immediately to perform those terms. However, at the
same time, they intended to put it in more precise or broad form. Secondly, the situation is such
that the parties have agreed to the terms of the contract and have performed on one or more terms
conditional on the execution of a formal document. The third situation is that the parties do not
want to be bound unless a formal document is completed. In the first and second conditions, the
contract is valid and binding on the parties. In third situation, it is not binding on the parties.
Application:
As per the second condition enumerated above in the case of Masters v Cameron, the
contract is binding on both the parties.
Conclusion:
Here, Tina is legally bound to buy the Business as she signed the heads of the agreement.

2
CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
Part B:
Issue:
The issue involved in this case was whether Tina is legally bound by the contract if she
had added a conditional term in the Heads of the Agreement.
Rule:
As per the decision of High Court of Australia in the case of Master v Cameron (1954) 91
CLR 353, a signed contract can be three types. In the first and second types of signed contract,
the contract is binding on the parties as depicted in the Rules portion of Part A of question 1. In
the third category, the signed contract is such that the intention of the parties is not to make a
concluded contract unless a formal contract is executed.
Application:
As per the rule enumerated above, the contract is not binding on the parties until the
condition mentioned in the agreement is fulfilled.
Conclusion:
Tina is not bound by the contract executed between her and Jeff.
Answer 2:
Issue:
a) Whether Phil can be held liable for the unpaid debt?
b) Whether Robert can be held liable for unpaid debt?