Contract Law: Analysis of Statements, Exclusion Clause, and Promissory Estoppel

Running head: CONTRACT LAW
CONTRACT LAW
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author Note:

CONTRACT LAW1
1.
Issue:
The issue to be analyzed in the present case scenario is that whether the statement by
Jimmy will be the part of the sale contract.
Rules:
Statements made by the parties during making of a contract are to be considered whether
they are terms of the contract or the representations as this helps in determining the cause of
action as well as remedy available as laid in Handbury v Nolan (1977) 13 ALR 33912. Mainly
four elements are checked to differentiate between the term and misrepresentation.
Firstly, the relative knowledge of the parties are checked such that the one with better
knowledge when makes the statement, then it amounts to the term of the contract as observed
in the case of
Oscar Chess Ltd v Williams [1957] 1 All ER 3253.
Secondly, it is checked whether one party has relied on the statement made by the other
party. The statement will amount to a term when the party to whom the statement is made has
relied on it and entered into the contract on the basis of it as observed.
Thirdly, it is checked that whether the statement is written in the contract, in such case, it
amounts to the term as observed in Causer v Browne [1952] VLR 14.
Finally, the timing of the statement is checked. When much time has gone after the
statement is made, then it is more likely to be the representation.
1 Handbury v Nolan (1977) 13 ALR 339.
2 Lambiris, Michael A., and Laura Griffin. First Principles of Business Law: Textbook and EStudy Modules. (Oxford
University Press, 2017).
3
Oscar Chess Ltd v Williams [1957] 1 All ER 325.
4 Causer v Browne [1952] VLR 1.

CONTRACT LAW2
Application:
From the facts given, it is seen that when Joanna went to purchase the lawnmower, she
was assisted by Jimmy who stated that the mowmaster 500 was perfect for it. She checks it and
finally relying on her statements planned to buy it. A quick perusal of the four elements
mentioned in the rules, it is seen that Jimmy has better knowledge about the mower, the
statements were unwritten, the statement was relied upon by Joanna and relying on it, she
planned to buy it immediately. All these reveal that the statements amount to contract term.
Conclusion:
A perusal of the facts of the case and by referring to the rules discussed above it can be
concluded that statement by Jimmy will be term of contrac.
2.
Issue:
The issue to be analyzed in the present case scenario is that whether the sign can be
construed to the contract with Lawnmower city.
Rules:
Exclusion clause can be considered as an unfair term which is used by a party to a
contract to exclude his liability or limit his liability to some conditions against another5. Such
exclusion clause can be regarded as the part of the contract and binding on the parties when it is
incorporated in the contract and whether the rule of contra proferentem is applied as in Handbury
v Nolan (1977) 13 ALR 3396. Incorporation is done by signature as in L'Estrange v F Graucob
5 Lambiris, Michael A., and Laura Griffin. First Principles of Business Law: Textbook and EStudy Modules. (Oxford
University Press, 2017).
6 Handbury v Nolan (1977) 13 ALR 339.