Contract and Consumer Law Analysis: Case Study on Troy's Obligations

This case study examines Troy's contractual obligations to various parties, including Hector, a luggage store, TAFE, his accountancy firm, and his parents. The analysis determines the enforceability of each agreement based on elements such as offer, acceptance, consideration, and intent to create legal relations. Troy is legally bound to fulfill his obligations to Hector, the luggage store, TAFE, and the accountancy firm. However, the agreement with his parents lacks the intention to create legal relations, thus relieving Troy of any legal obligation to repay the credit card debts. Desklib provides this and many other solved assignments for students.

CONTRACT AND CONSUMER LAW
STUDENT ID:
[Pick the date]

Question 2
It is apparent that Troy has a contractual relationship with multiple parties and hence needs to
discharge the underlying obligations. The various sums are discussed below.
Hector – There is an enforceable contract between Hector and Troy with regards to the sale of
books. There is a valid agreement between the two and also consideration for each party is
present. Further, there is intent to be legally bound and hence if Troy does not pay the agreed
sum, there would be a breach of contract and Hector can sue Troy for claiming the remaining
amount (Carter, 2012).
Luggage Store- There is an enforceable contract between luggage store and Troy since all the
requisite elements of the contract such as valid offer, valid acceptance, lawful mutual
consideration, intention of enter legal relationship are all present. As a result, Troy needs to make
the pending installments or the contract would be breached (Lindgren, 2015).
TAFE- In this case also, there is a commercial relationship between the University and Troy
where there is mutual consideration. Further, all the other relevant aspects of a valid contract are
also present, thus resulting in a legally enforceable contract. Hence, Troy needs to fulfill his
obligations of paying the pending course fee or the university is entitled to pursue legal options
to recover the same (Davenport and Parker, 2014).
Accountancy Firm – There is a contractual relationship between employer and employee. The
employment contract enacted between the firm and Troy contains a clause about the employee
being personally liable for any damage caused to property. Clearly, Troy has damaged firm
property by breaking the class and hence owes the money for the same to the firm (Carter, 2012).
Parents – It is noteworthy that in domestic or social arrangements, the intention to form legal
relationships is often missing as highlighted in the Jones v Padavatton [1968] EWCA Civ 4 case.
In the given scenario also, Troy would not have any legal liability to pay the sums of credit card
to his parents since no contract exists between Troy and his parents (Paterson, Robertson and
Duke, 2015).

References
Carter, J. (2012) Contract Act in Australia. 3rd ed. Sydney: LexisNexis Publications.
Davenport, S. and Parker, D. (2014) Business and Law in Australia 2nd ed. Sydney: LexisNexis
Publications.
Lindgren, K.E. (2015) Vermeesch and Lindgren's Business Law of Australia 12th ed. Sydney:
LexisNexis Publications.
Paterson, J. Robertson, A. and Duke, A. (2015) Principles of Contract Law 5th ed. Sydney:
Thomson Reuters.