logo

(Solution) Contract Law : Assignment

   

Added on  2021-04-21

7 Pages1263 Words90 Views
 | 
 | 
 | 
Running head: CONTRACT LAWContract LawName of the studentName of the universityAuthor note
(Solution) Contract Law : Assignment_1

1CONTRACT LAWFirst scenario Issue Can Richard sue the shock absorber company for the wrong shock absorbers provided to him aswell as the loss incurred by him in relation to the Jeep.Rule According to Latimer (2010, p. 112) a misrepresentation is a false statement which is made by aparty to a contract through which the innocent party is persuaded to get into the contract. Thereare three types of Misrepresentations, namely innocent, fraudulent and negligentmisrepresentation. A misrepresentation is innocent where the party making it does not haveknowledge about it. A fraudulent misrepresentation takes place when a party deliberatelyindulges in misrepresentation. A negligent misrepresentation is triggered when the partyunknowingly makes a false presentation but if it took reasonable steps, the mistake could havebeen avoided. In the case of Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd [1964] AC 465 ithad been ruled by the court that the aggrieved party has the right to recession as well as damagesfor any losses incurred by him in relation to a negligent misrepresentation. Application Richard has entered into a contract with Emma (agent of Shocks Are Us) for purchasing shockabsorbers required to restore his jeeps and enable it to operate on rough rods. He has beenprovided with wrong absorbers. He relied on the advice of Emma to purchase them and Emmahad reasonable chance to ensure that he provides Richard with correct advice. Therefore
(Solution) Contract Law : Assignment_2

2CONTRACT LAWnegligent misrepresentation has been done by Emma and as per Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller& Partners Ltd Richard can opt for recession and also claim losses incurred by him. Conclusion Richard can sue Shocks Are Us to rescind the contract and consequential damages. Second Scenario Issue Can George successfully sue Richard for the amount of rent unpaid by him as per George’spromise?Rule When a person paid a less payment in relation to an already existing contractual duty he cannotrely on the fact that the balance had been forgiven by the other party unless an additionalconsideration was provided by him and is liable to pay the full amount. These provisions havebeen discussed by the court in relation to addressing the issue in the case of Foakes v Beer(1883-84) L.R. 9 App. Cas. 605.On the other hand it had been ruled by the court in the case of Woodhouse A.C. Israel CocoaLtd. v. Nigerian Product Marketing Co. Ltd. [1972] AC 741 that a party can uses the doctrine ofpromissory estoppels as a “defense” against a claim but not as a claim itself where there has beena change in the initial contractual duty and the position of the party due to the a unambiguousand clear promise made by the other party. Application
(Solution) Contract Law : Assignment_3

End of preview

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

Related Documents
Negligent Misstatement Assignment
|6
|1042
|129

Business Law Assignment : Emma
|7
|1297
|29

Business and Corporation Law: Assignment
|7
|1337
|35

(PDF) Business Law Assignment : Heller & Partners Ltd
|6
|1029
|76

(Sample) Assignment on Business Law
|7
|1240
|44

What liabilities ABC has under common law with respect to misrepresentation made by the same?
|7
|1724
|455