Rights and Remedies in Contract Law

This report discusses the rights and remedies available to parties in contract law cases. It covers topics such as implied terms, misrepresentation, and the legal implications of entering into a contract. Case studies are used to illustrate these concepts.

CONTRACT LAW

Contents
INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................3
QUESTION 1........................................................................................................................................3
QUESTION 2........................................................................................................................................5
CONCLUSION.....................................................................................................................................7

INTRODUCTION
Contract law refers to the body of law which is legally bound upon the parties if they
agreed to enter into the agreement. In respect of entering into the contract, it is necessary to
fulfill the basic essential elements to make the contract valid such as offer, acceptance,
consideration and also intention of parties to enter into the valid contract1. In this report the 2
question are discussed which reflects the various rights and remedies which is available to the
parties in respect of securing their interest in the contract.
QUESTION 1
Issue:
In this case the issues is raised regarding entering into the contract on the bases of
implied terms which is presented by Amin regarding offering the London home for sale. As
Ben asked Amin regarding the issues of having the dry rot problems in the roof. In context of
giving the reply regarding not carrying any such problems, the contract is made between the
Amin and Ben in exchange for £2 million. The crises which is raised after entering into the
contract is that ben started decorating the house and examined that the dry rot problem occurs
which require professional treatment and for that £75,000 is to be needed for overall
procedure.
Rules:
Under the contract act, 1990, it is stated that all contract are not agreement but all
agreement are formed as contract. It is necessary to fulfill all the essential elements
mentioned in the contract such as parties must be competent to handle the contract as per the
set instruction mentioned in the contract2. If both the party agree to follow all the terms, they
are legally bound by the court to follow it. In respect of entering into contract, it is necessary
to offer, accept, consideration and also legal intention to follow all the terms and condition
mentioned in the contract. The remedies which the plaintiff party can enjoy in respect of
breach committed regarding following the terms.
This is supported with the case of Carlill V Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. [1893] 1 QB
256, as in this case the issues is raised regarding offering the ball in exchange of getting high
rewards on the purchase of particular products3. But after using such products, Carlill
suffered from flu and thus, file the suit against the company in respect of breach committed.
In respect of terms implied under the common law, it is stated that it is not necessary
to mention everything in the contract but the terms which are implied are liable to be
performed by the party, if it is equal important to make the contract valid4.
1 Austen-Baker, R., 2017. Implied terms in English contract law. Edward Elgar
Publishing.
2 Cherry, M. A., 2017. The Sharing Economy and the Edges of Contract Law:
Comparing US and UK Approaches. Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 85. p.1804.
3 Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co [1893] 1 QB 256. 2020. [Online]. Available
through: <https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/carlill-v-carbolic-smoke-ball-co.php>.

It is explained with the case of Liverpool City Council V Irwin [1977] AC 239 in this
case the matters reflects the situation of the non-payment of the rent in respect of not carrying
any such condition in the tenancy agreement5. As the judgment which the court made is
relating to not carrying any such condition regarding repairing the building and paying
money for the losses incurred.
Application:
By applying the case of Carlill V Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. [1893] 1 QB, the matters
which reflects the present case scenario is relating to the entering into the contract in
exchange of consideration. Similarly to the present case, Amin and Ben enter into the
contract regarding selling and buying the London home and such contract is made on the
bases of the consideration6. Thus, it indicates that the contract is valid and also both the
parties are liable to fulfill the terms of contract. In respect of matters related to the implied
terms, regarding dry rot problems in the roof, the suggestion is made on the bases of
confusing matter regarding not carrying any knowledge about such problems. Thus, by
agreeing the statement regarding accepting all the terms and condition mentioned in the
contract, both the parties enter into the set terms and condition. Ben carry the rights to file the
suit if the breach committed in respect of not sharing the information about the dry rot
problems7. In that case, Ben carry the right to claim for liquidate damages which they fix
during the formation of the contract. Through this manner, they enjoy the right regarding
getting relief from the unexpected damages.
In respective of judgment which is applied in the case of Liverpool City Council V
Irwin [1977] AC 239, the matter reflects that the terms are not mentioned in the contract
regarding facing any issues in the building. Thus, the claim is not raised for this perspective
and by linking this judgment to the present case, it is stipulated that the matter related to dry
rot problem is not stated in the contract and thus Amin is not liable to pay any damages for
the loss incurred8.
Conclusion:
From the above study, the report concludes the matters relating to examining the right
and remedies of ben in respect of entering into the contract or the loss which is incurred by
undertaking the professional treatment for the dry-rot. Under Statute law, in respect of
contract act, 1990, it stated that both the parties enter into the contract by knowing all the
facts and information about the home. Thus, no claim for liquidated damages or breach raised
4 Smits, J. M. ed., 2017. Contract law: a comparative introduction. Edward Elgar
Publishing.
5 Liverpool County Council v Irwin [1977] AC 239, HL. 2020. [Online]. Available
through: <https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/lcc-v-irwin.php>.
6 Howells, G. G., 2017. The European Union's Influence on English Consumer
Contract Law. Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 85. p.1904.
7 Lim, E. and Chan, C., 2018. Problems with Wednesbury unreasonableness in contract
law: lessons from public law.
8 Graziano, T. K., 2019. Comparative contract law: cases, materials and exercises.
Edward Elgar Publishing.

in respect of hiding any information during the time of purchase. Thus, the right which the
Ben carry if he inspected the places before accepting the offer of purchasing the home.
In respective of common law, it is stipulated that the by referring the judgment for the
other case which is already existed before, the matters related to the terms of law are raised in
this aspects. As the option for liquidated damages are not given to the parties as Ben
personally satisfied with the terms which is given by Amin regarding purchasing the
property. It also indicated that no condition is mentioned regarding paying compensation for
the further issues which is raised in the building. Thus, no right and remedies are available to
ben regarding filling suit against the breach committed in purchasing the property.
QUESTION 2
Issue:
In this case, the matters reflects the fraud committed in respect of buying and selling
the diamond rings at £30,000. As the fraud is committed by the person who uses the name as
John Dagood, the son of the multi-billionaire Jeffery Dagood by introducing her to Harrolds
store in Knightsbridge in London. As the John propose that he pay the ring money through
the personal Cheque. After not getting convinced, the owner of the Harrolds store called at
many places to confirm the person and after that the cheque is accepted. But later on the truth
is revealed in respect of rejection of cheque regarding not carrying any legitimate. After
conducting the enquiry, the facts revealed that the ring is sold to some other jewelry shop by
giving the reason in respect of paying the gambling debts. The ring is sold for the amount of
£20,000.
Rules:
Under the contract act, 1990 both the parties enter into the agreement in writing by
following all the terms and condition mentioned in the contract. As it is necessary that the
parties must enter into the mutual agreement to follow all the terms and condition mentioned
in the contract9. Usually the parties’ must decide the consideration amount in case of breach
committed in respect of not following any of the terms.
Vitiating factors:
Under common law, Misrepresentation act, 1967, it refers to the false statement which
is made between the parties regarding hiding the truth and facts during entering into the
contract10. It mainly carries three types of misrepresentation such as:
Innocent misrepresentation: In this, the misrepresentation occurs by not familiar with the
facts which is going to be happen after undertaking such work.
9 Clarke, P. H., 2017. Curbing the Abuse of a Dominant Position Through Unfair
Contract Terms Legislation: Australian and UK Comparison. In The Constitutional
Dimension of Contract Law. (pp. 185-216). Springer, Cham.
10 Beale, H and et.al., 2019. Cases, materials and text on contract law. Bloomsbury
Publishing.

Negligent misrepresentation: In this the statement which is made by the person are familiar
that the wrong activity happens if they deal in any such work11.
Fraudulent misrepresentation: It refers to committing fraud with the intention of knowing the
facts or also recklessly or carelessly committed such activity.
This is explained with the case of Doyle V Olby [1969] 2 QB 158, this indicated that
Doyle purchased the business from Obly regarding committing fraud misrepresentation about
the profits and operation of the business. Thus, by this aspects, Doyle suffered loss in the
business as the amount of £5500 and he file the suit against getting the compensation under
the tort of deceit12. In this aspects the judgment is made in respect of carrying the activity
under the fraudulent misrepresentation and thus damages are incurred under the tort of deceit.
Remedies:
In respect of lapse of time no person is liable to get compensation once the time is
lapsed or also the truth is examined after the certain time period. This is supported with the
case of Leaf V International galleries [1950] 2 KB 86, both the parties deal in innocent
misrepresentation regarding buying the painting instead of not knowing the truth13. But the
truth they revealed resulting in time lapsed and thus not carry any time to file suit against the
accused.
Application:
By applying the case Doyle V Olby [1969] 2 QB 158 in the present case study, the
matters related to the fraudulent misrepresentation in which the fraud is made by Obly
regarding hiding the truth. Similarly to this case study, the person who committed fraud by
using the name of John Dogood, committing fraud in respect of buying the ring by using the
other person name. As this results in punishing the person under the Misrepresentations Act,
in respect of hiding the actual identity and also entering into the contract by using the other
person name14. The person is liable to get damages under the Tort of deceit in which the legal
injury is imposed upon the party regarding knowing the facts or intentionally harm that
person for personal benefits. Similarly to the present case, the defendant use the name of John
Dagood to buy the ring and also sell it to other person by giving the reason of paying the
gambling debts15. Thus, by viewing this matter, Harrolds carry the rights to get compensation
under tort of Deceit.
In respect of undertaking the judgment which is given under Leaf V International
galleries [1950] 2 KB 86 case, it stipulated that the time is lapsed regarding providing the
fraud committed to Harrolds. Time is lapsed in respect of knowing the actual truth regarding
11 DiMatteo, L. A. and Hogg, M. eds., 2016. Comparative Contract Law: British and
American Perspectives. Oxford University Press.
12 Doyle v Olby (Ironmongers) Ltd [1969] 2 QB 158. 2020. [Online]. Available
through: <https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/doyle-v-olby.php>.
13 Leaf v International Galleries [1950] 2 KB 86. 2020. [Online]. Available through:
<https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/leaf-v-international-galleries.php>.
14 Taylor, R. and Taylor, D., 2019. Contract Law Directions. Directions.
15 Arvind, T. T., 2017. Contract law. Oxford University Press.

the ring matters and also the fraud committed by the person in respect of buying the buying16.
Thus, under the lapse of time, ho also not carry any rights in respect of getting damages for
the losses incurred. As the ring is sold to other jewelry shop in exchange of the consideration.
Thus, in this case Harrolds not carry any right to file suit in context of damages recovered.
Conclusion:
From the above matters the study which is concluded that the Harrolds not carry any
such right regarding getting compensation for the losses incurred. As the first reason indicted
the time lapse as the accused not be identified during that particular time period in respect of
paying the amount. It also examined that the owner of the stores accepts the money which is
against their norms and this if the suit is filled they are not liable to get compensation for the
losses bear. The rights are mainly undertaken if such misrepresentation is caught and also
accused is convicted for such offences committed
CONCLUSION
From the above assignment the report present the aspects which is covered under the
contract law. In this report the matters which are studied in first case is relating to entering
into the contract through the implied terms but no breach is examined and thus parties not
obliged to pay compensation for the losses incurred. In second question the matter reflects the
fraud misrepresentation in respect of hiding the truth and committing fraud. Thus the right of
the parties are discussed which is mentioned under the contract law.
16 De Franceschi, A., 2016. European contract law and the digital single
market. Cambridge: Intersentia.