Corporation & Enterprise Law Question 2022

Running head: QUESTION 0
Corporation & Enterprise Law
APRIL 8, 2020
STUDENT DETAILS

“QUESTION” 1
Contents
Answer 1:...................................................................................................................................................2
Issue.......................................................................................................................................................2
Rule........................................................................................................................................................2
Application.............................................................................................................................................3
Conclusion.............................................................................................................................................4
Answer 2:...................................................................................................................................................5
Issue.......................................................................................................................................................5
Rule........................................................................................................................................................5
Application.............................................................................................................................................6
Conclusion.............................................................................................................................................6
Answer 3:...................................................................................................................................................7
Issue.......................................................................................................................................................7
Rule........................................................................................................................................................7
Application.............................................................................................................................................8
Conclusion.............................................................................................................................................8
References................................................................................................................................................9

“QUESTION” 2
Answer 1:
Issue
In this provided situation, the issue is that whether there is binding contract between
Graham and shop.
Rule
The valid contract is considered as expressed or written agreement between two or
more than two contracting persons to render the services or products. As per the
common law, there are certain elements to make contract valid. These elements are
acceptance, offer, consideration, intention to develop legal relationship, and capacity of
parties in relation to mental disability and age. It can see that not all the agreements are
essentially contractual (Ghazali, et. al, 2019). The parties should be deemed to have
intention to be bound legally. Further, the express contract is contract in which both the
contracting persons state terms of contract. The terms of contract can be verbal or
written. On the other hand, the implied contract is a contract that concludes
circumstances of the case or actions of contracting persons. In addition, the implied
contract is not explicitly or formally stated in the words (Zheng, et. al, 2018).
Further, the offer takes place when one contracting person presents something of value
that he or she desires to exchange for something else of value. The offer is essential to
make the contract. Further, it can see that the offer can be accepted or rejected
(Prasad, 2019). Next significant element is acceptance of offer. Acceptance means that
the given offer was accepted. Next element of valid contract is consideration. The
consideration should be present in every contract. It is essentially required that

“QUESTION” 3
consideration should be real and legal. In addition, the fourth element of valid contract is
intention to make legal relationship. The intention of contracting persons to the contract
should be to make legal relation between them. The agreements of social nature are not
contracts because they do not consider legal relationship. It can see that if both the
parties are competent enough to a contract, then the agreement becomes the contract
(Ontiveros, 2018).
Application
In this given case, it can see that Graham had intention to purchase antique dining
table. Graham enquired about the price of table. In reply, the shop assistant said that
the cost of table is $5,000. Graham gave acceptance to this offer. Graham also gave
address to the shop assistant and asked to deliver that table. In addition, it can also see
that both the contracting persons have consideration of what they would have in return.
Graham expects the table to be delivered while the shop assistance expects to get the
pay in delivery of the table. As per the common law, both parties must be in capacity to
take entry into the agreement to make contract to be valid. In legal terms, it is required
that both the contracting persons should have sound mind at the time of making a
contract. In the provided situation, the shop assistant as well as Graham had sound
mind. The reason is that Graham had knowledge about his desire and conduct. In
different terms, Graham knew that what to get by asking the price of dining table.
Additionally, the shop assistant made acceptance to the delivery of table and get
payment on delivery. It shows that Shop assistant was of sound mind. In this way, all
the elements of valid contract are present so it is binding contract between them.

“QUESTION” 4
Conclusion
As per the above discussion, it can be concluded that there is binding contract between
shop and Graham and shop for the reason that all the elements for valid contract were
considered.

“QUESTION” 5
Answer 2:
Issue
The issue is that whether the agreement was enforceable or not enforceable.
Rule
The intention to create legal relations is a principle adopted in the contract law. It is
established by this principle that whether the court should believe that contracting
persons of agreement require agreement to be enforceable by law. It is also mentioned
by the principle that the agreement is lawfully enforceable only if they are believed to
have intended to be the binding contract. The intention to make legal relations is
described as intention to enter the lawfully binding contract. It can say that it is one of
the essential elements of creation of contract. It is evident that the contract is legally
binding agreement (Bigwood, 2018). The ‘intention to create legal relations’ converts the
agreement into valid contact. The evidence is required about a fact that contracting
persons intended to make legal agreement. In absence of evidence, the agreement
creates legal obligation in which one party in breach can be prosecuted. In addition, the
court will not enforce the contract that do not have intention to create legal relationship.
It takes place in the situation where both the contracting persons have mutual social or
domestic relationship (Harrison, 2019).
It can see that the intention to create legal relationship can be checked by conducting
test. In the case of “Balfour v Balfour [1919] 2 KB 571”, court held that the agreement
was morally domestic as well as social agreement. Thus, it was presumed that they did
not intend to be bound legally. Additionally, the case of “Merritt v Merritt [1970] 1 WLR

“QUESTION” 6
1211” is famous case. In this case, husband left his wife. It was the case of separation.
It was held by the court that it was binding agreement. Court of Appeal distinguished the
matter of “Balfour v Balfour” by establishing that the contracting persons were
separated. When spouse has separated, this is considered that the parties do intend to
be bound by the agreement. The signed written agreement signified the intention to be
bound.
Application
In the provided situation, Susan and Andrew had got separation in 2018. They made an
agreement after residing separately for twelve months. It can say that the contracting
persons appeared to be in social relationship because of their last status of relationship.
However, there is an exception as stated in the case of “Merritt v Merritt”. It is because
a fact that the contracting persons were separated. In this way, the parties would be
presumed to make the intention to be legally bound. Further to assume that the
agreement was developed in a written manner and therefore the parties had the
intention to be bound.
Conclusion
In conclusion, it can say that Andrew was not correct to say that the agreement is not
enforceable. It is clear that the agreement was enforceable. The reason is that the
contract was not made in domestic setting, notwithstanding the fact that contracting
persons are expected to have social relation.

“QUESTION” 7
Answer 3:
Issue
The issue is that what legal argument could Chris give to keep back contract for sale?
Rule
In contract law, there are certain factors that have great influence on the acceptance of
offeree. It can see that sometimes these factors can make the contract voidable or void.
It can say that the void contract is intrinsically unenforceable. In different terms, the valid
contract can become void contract because of the different factors. These factors are
misrepresentation of facts, mistakes, undue influence as well as incapacity of any or
both of the contracting persons. These above discussed factors can take place in the
case in which one contacting person takes entry into the contract due to any pressure or
force (Pawloswki, 2018).
In addition, the undue influence is situation in which one party takes advantage of the
post of powers over other party. Thus, this unfairness in powers amid the contracting
persons can vitiate the consent of one contracting person, as they are not able to
practice the independent determination. Moreover, in the situation wherever the third
contracting person gets advantage of this influence, then contract cannot be held
accountable unless the third contracting person was in the position to test whether there
was free consent of applicant. It is possible to terminate contract by making mutual
agreement between parties (Marsh, 2017).

“QUESTION” 8
Application
In this given situation, Chris and George are contracting persons of contract. In this
case, it was found that Chris was influenced by the words of Bruce. Bruce had no any
connection with the final contract. It can say that it was because of the undue influence.
The undue influence took place because of the statement provided by Bruce. Due to
the fear of death of dog, Chris made a contract with George to sell his all dogs. In this
situation, George in a capacity of third contracting person, was not able to test that
Chris entered into contract out of free consent. In addition, George had no knowledge
about the discussion made between Chris and Bruce. Thus, Chris took decision to sell
the all dogs due to the undue influence.
Conclusion
According to this discussion, it can be concluded that Chris cannot keep back the
contract for sale on the basis of grounds of undue influence. However, Chris can ask
George for the mutual agreement. Even though, the consent of George is essentially
required for creating mutual agreement.

“QUESTION” 9
References
Balfour v Balfour [1919] 2 KB 571
Bigwood, R., (2018) The Undue Influence of ‘Non-Australian’Undue Influenc e Law on
Australian Undue Influence Law: Farewell Johnson v Buttress? Part II. Journal of
Contract Law (JCL), 35(Part 3).
Ghazali, N.A., Sipan, I., Abas, F.N., Fauziah, R. and Mohammad, M.T.S.H., (2019)
Concept of Valid Contract Declaration of Waqf Property in Islamic Law. Journal of
Fatwa Management and Research, pp.181-206.
Harrison, J.L., (2019) Duress and Undue Influence in Contract Law as Cognitive
Trespass: An Essay. Available at SSRN 3455590
Marsh, P., (2017) Contract law. In Contracting for project management, pp. 65-80
Merritt v Merritt [1970] 1 WLR 1211
Ontiveros, M.L., (2018) Liquidated Damages in Guest Worker Contracts: Involuntary
Servitude, Debt Peonage or Valid Contract Clause. Nev. LJ, 19, p.413
Pawlowski, M. (2018) Wills-A binding contract. Trusts and Estates Law & Tax Journal,
(195), pp.12-15.
Prasad, B. (2019) Law of Contract I & II.
The common law

“QUESTION” 10
The contract law
Zheng, X., Griffith, D.A., Ge, L. and Benoliel, U., (2020) Effects of Contract Ambiguity in
Interorganizational Governance. Journal of Marketing, p.0022242920910096