Contract Law | Assignment
Question 1: 20 marks, 25% of the subject Kanga
14 Pages3522 Words55 Views
Added on 2020-03-04
Contract Law | Assignment
Question 1: 20 marks, 25% of the subject Kanga
Added on 2020-03-04
ShareRelated Documents
Running head: CONTRACT LAWContract LawName of the Student:Name of the University:Author Note
1CONTRACT LAWTable of ContentsAnswer 1:...................................................................................................................................2Issue:......................................................................................................................................2Relevant Rule:........................................................................................................................2Analysis:.................................................................................................................................5Conclusion:............................................................................................................................7Answer 2:...................................................................................................................................7Issue........................................................................................................................................7Relevant Rule:........................................................................................................................7Analysis:.................................................................................................................................9Conclusion:..........................................................................................................................11Reference List:.........................................................................................................................12
2CONTRACT LAWAnswer 1:Issue:In the case law that is provided the issue is whether Kanga Pty Ltd which is acompany situated in Brisbane has committed breach of contract by being unable to deliver the100 tonnes of beef meat properly to Sing Pty Ltd due to unforeseeable circumstances andunder the CIF contract?Relevant Rule:Offer and acceptance are the core elements of a contract1. The offer should have beenmade for a consideration and then the obligations of both the parties are decided. The partiesshould also be competent to contract and they should also have the capacity2. These are fewof the basic elements which need to be kept in mind while forming a valid contract. Anotherimportant thing that should be kept in mind while forming a contract is that any goods whicha seller is willing to sell should match the description which is made in the contract. A buyerhas every right to get only that product and also to pay for that product which they havespecifically ordered3. Even under the CIF rule it is the basic duty of the seller to make sure1 Deep, Shumank, Deepak Singh, and Syed Aqeel Ahmad. "A review of contract awards to lowest bidder inIndian construction projects via case based approach." Open Journal of Business and Management 5.1 (2017):159-68.2 Hughes, Will, Ronan Champion, and John Murdoch. Construction contracts: law and management.Routledge, 2015.3 Barnett, Randy E., and Nathan B. Oman. Contracts: Cases and Doctrine. Wolters Kluwer Law & Business,2016.
3CONTRACT LAWthat the goods which are being shipped match to the description in the contract. In case thegoods do not match then the buyer has the right to not accept the goods and also claim fordamages.Goods description also includes the date in which the goods are meant to be shippedalso including the packaging details. This basic rule was put down in the case of ManbreSaccharine Co. Ltd v. Corn Products Co. Ltd4. The case dealt with selling of starch in 280lbbags. The contract had specified that the goods will be delivered to the buyer in the properpackaging but the goods were unfortunately shipped partly in 280lb bags and the rest in 140lbbags which was against the terms agreed between the buyer and seller. The seller was of theview that packaging does not form an essential element when it comes to description ofgoods and also that this condition was not vital for the agreement5. The court on the otherhand was of the view that the seller could not escape this liability by saying that packagingwas not an essential part of the agreement and that it did not form an important part when itcame to description of goods. The court was also of the view that the seller was in breach oftheir duties by providing goods in packages which were contrary to the description of goodsmentioned in the contract6.Thus from the case mentioned above it can be inferred that description of the goodswhether it be in the form of packaging or any other form should be maintained by the seller.4Chirelstein, Marvin. Chirelstein's Concepts and Case Analysis in the Law of Contracts, 7th (Concepts andInsights Series). West Academic, 2013.5 Lorenzon, Filippo, et al. CIF and FOB contracts. Vol. 5. Sweet & Maxwell, 2012.6Rules, Local. "For Sale." Trustee 28 (2013): 148.
End of preview
Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.
Related Documents
Contract Law - Case Study Of Airbus Corporation Ltd | Breach Of Termslg...
|11
|2507
|32
LAWS20062 - International Commercial Lawlg...
|13
|3191
|135
Basics of CIF Contract and Contracts of Carriagelg...
|8
|2258
|84
Issues Faced by EviroPro Pty Ltdlg...
|7
|1564
|152
Business Law Case Studies with ACL Analysislg...
|6
|858
|415
Contract Law and Sale of Goods Act | Assignmentlg...
|5
|1472
|162