Enforceable Agreement and Remedies in Breach of Contract

This article discusses the enforceability of agreements in breach of contract cases, focusing on the case of Tom and Wing. It explains the requirements for a valid contract and the importance of written agreements. It also explores the potential remedies that Wing could seek if successful in a legal action against Tom for breach of contract.

Law Case

Table of Contents
PART A...........................................................................................................................................3
PART B............................................................................................................................................5
PART C ...........................................................................................................................................6
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................9

PART A
1. How would court determine as there is an enforceable agreement between Wing and Tom
In the context of case of Tom and Wing in which Wing was an honest and innovative
employee and due to his abilities and ideas, Tom's computers throughout 2019 get success. Wing
was more able and capacity to support his company to accomplish their goals and take
competitive advantages. Competitor of Tom's computer, Jerry approached Wing and offered him
a great salary if he leave Tom's organization but being honest, Wing discussed this with his
manager Tom. By listening this, Tom suggested to Wing that to not leave as he will offer him a
large salary and also allow him a partnership position from 1st July 2020. But after completing
this working tenure Tom refused to increase his salary and to make him a business partner. After
that they argued and Wing was terminated. So, from this case it can be said that court will not
determine it as an enforceable agreement between them as there were no legal and written
agreement. Tom suggested Wing orally and it was mutual communication and agreement. There
are some rules and regulations in employment agreement which should be considered by both
parties while making a contract and continuing business operation with some terms and
conditions. As per the employment agreement of Australia, all employees of Australia require to
have a common law of contract which specify some terms and conditions.
In addition, it can be considered as unenforceable when courts find employment
agreement signed after offer letter or other contract. It's a contract that can be made at the time of
hiring employee and after recruitment if they make any changes in salary, designation and other
element of employee. For making an enforceable contract, there is a requirement to have all
terms, conditions written down in it. In the context of legal agreement, enforceable agreement
between 2 parties is one who is not restricted by any law. In the regards to Tom and Wing case in
which Tom cheated on Wing and did not fulfil his promise, it can be said that it was a reciprocal
consideration because in this case, Tom offered Wing salary increment which can give value to
Wing and the other party or Wing is considered as a receipt of it (Enforceable Contract, 2020).
Without formation of a contract, the same exchange and exchange orally is considered as a gift
from the offeror, rather than enforceable contract. It was a oral contract because Tom only

suggested and asked Wing to not to leave the company and in this exchange he will double up
his salary. Contract can be made orally as well as written and oral agreement as compare to
written are far more difficult. In oral agreement and make them legal or enforceable, court
requires strong evidence like recording of that agreement but in this case there was no recording
and strong evidence which can make bound to the court to consider it enforceable and give
fairness to Wing. So, it can also be said that oral agreements and modifications which Tom made
are binding amendments to contract, in so far as the change is acknowledged by both parties. For
making an oral as well as written contract valid, it is important to have agreement by both of the
parties voluntarily and proper details. Without the proper and insufficient details and all
conditions of the contract made between parties, it is considered as invalid contract. This applies
to customary requirements for certain fields, covering technological inventions and other
patentable processes. So, it can be said that from all evidence and resource that this case of Tom
and Wing can not be considered as a enforceable contract by the court due to lack of evidence
(Hsu, 2016).
2. Remedies could be granted if Wing was successful in legal action for breach of contracts
against Tom
As the case is provided it was the mutual communication between tom and wing. But in
the case if the contract was done between the wing and tom. Wing would use the certain
remedies for the unethical behaviour done by tom. These many remedies which will be used by
wing like the money damages and many more. Wing would demand money form tom which
would include the damages for the mental problems faced by wing for the problems faced by
wing while working in the effective way (Cabrelli, 2016). Wing can fie the case against the tom
and demand money form the to against problems faced by wing while filing the case ad the
expenses in occurred by the while fighting the case against tom. These could be said as the
compensation for wing. Money damage is said to have the sum of the money which will have to
be paid by tom after fighting the case in the court. In the restitution it would be said that it will
restore the injured part and parties would not de mad more money form the other party. The laws
will provide the position to the people which are involved while working in the effective way.
These remedies would be used by wing to fulfil the certain actions in the effective way. Wing

would fight in court but wing need to have certain evidences for proving the innocence of self
and for proving the crime of tom.
PART B
Issues
As in the case wing has been interested to have a buy with its promotional income of new
computer and laser along with scanner. Wing have purchased the products from the Lies IT Pty
which have the advertising regarding their all products with unconditional guarantee having full
level of refund. But the issues is that the company have refused t fund the amount on their
defective computer which is being received by wings. The case has been identified as the
misleading representation of product among consumers. The wings have the visitation regardless
to redeposition of its consumer rights which under the section of Australian consumer law in
more signifiant way of application.
Rule
According to Australian consumer law section 64, the suppliers should be aware and careful
regarding the say and word of signs to consumers in there respective advertisement along with
other respective documents. The supplier doesn't have the rights to tell there consumer about the
guarantees which is nor existing along with being excluding with having over all and particular
level of effects. The supplier should be clears which its offer along with application of consumer
right. The warranty period of the respective product as should be limited to specified express to
warranty period.
Application
In this case as the company have refused to fund the amount on their defective computer which
is being received by wings. As the company have modified the or have restricted the consumer
guarantee so this cases has been termed as the case of misleading representation which is
considered as the violation of right of consumer as per consumer Australian law. As per the case
of the ACCC v Hewlett-Packard [2013] FCA 653, the supplier has been proven guilty to shape
the consumer the rights which is being equivalents to the consumer guarantee. As per the above
case the supplier should be very clears while selling the products regarding the selling of
extended warranty. The supplier should be clears which its offer along with application of
consumer right.

Conclusion
From the above case it can be concluded that Wing have purchased the products from the Lies IT
Pty by advertising the products with unconditional guarantee having full level of refund. But
the company have refused to fund the amount on their defective computer which is being
received by wings. S the supplier (Lies IT Pty) has been proven guilty to shape the consumer the
rights. The company has been inculcated to have the application of civil penalty of false
representation regarding the existence and exclusion of the consumer guarantee remedy is $1.1
million for a body corporate and $220,000 for an individual.
Remedy
The remedy available to Mr. wing as been limited available atatat the business level of
discretion. The counter measure is being required to have the products being repairs multiple
time before being replaced by accompany .
The warranty period of the respective product as should be limited to specified express to
warranty period.
The supplier or the company doest have the right in order to have modification, restriction along
with being exclusion of guarantees.
The consumer should not have surrendering of right by having the level of aggressiveness charts
the there are lacks of application with regard to consumer applicability right. The maximum level
of civil penalty in order to have the providence of false representation regarding the existence
and exclusion of the consumer guarantee remedy is $1.1 million for a body corporate and
$220,000 for an individual. More to that the criminal penalties will be imposed along with
havering the same level of amount which is imposed ion above section

PART C
Issues
Mr. wing have the hearted wish to have the development of business from the obtained level of
incomer. He has identified as Sydney computer as the well level of opportunity for developing a
prosperous business. So he has level of appointing to Betty with regard to the investigation's of
financial consideration of the purposes business. As per the Betty advised wing have purchased
the business which has been turned out to full level of failure. This uses in more cases in being
identified that Betty have the misreading of accounts along with having serious accounting level
of errors. The issue is that company have lost it's all investment which is being invested in the
company.
Rule
As per the law of negligence and limitation of liability acts 2008 have the providence so the to
have the protections of the volunteers with regard to the providence of services in relational of
have the development of work in more significant manner along with havering the level of civil
liability acceptability in nature. As per the duty of work is considered as the reasonable care is
the defendant who owes the duty of care of another person in providence the level of
informational to plaintiff in every aspect of the risk which is been osculated with matter of
business chichis being assigned to him. In this case the Betty have the duty to have proper
evaluation's of risk which is being associated to new business.
Application
The negligence has the consisting of the five elements with if the duty of care which is owned by
defendant to plaintiff. This shave the major level of relationship to have the breaching of casualty
quality of the risk which is been associated with the negligence of Bette. Betty will be identified
as the guilty-ion order to make the suing and penalty imposed burden the act of negligence of the
careful duty which is being approved to hum in incarcerate order to have the development of the
business in more systematic and appropriate manner.
Conclusion
From the above case it can be concluded that the Betty advised wing have purchased the business
which has been turned out to full level of failure which is being due to the Betty have the
misreading of accounts along with having serious accounting level of errors. As per the law of

negligence and limitation of liability acts 2008, Betty has the duty to have proper evaluation's of
risk which is being associated to new business as he has been considered as guilty to have the
development of the such practices in company which is not considerer to be correct.
Remedy
There can be the inclusion of the defences by the claim of negligence tarts cane the such as the
major level of contribution in term of contributory negligence as wing and Betty both are
responsible to have analysis of the financial position of company in mop rte signifiant manner.
The next is about the claimant has freely consented to the negligent act. It amounts to an
agreement by the claimant to exempt the defendant from a duty of care that he would otherwise
owe. In this case the Betty have the duty to have proper evaluation's of risk which is being
associated to new business. Betty will be identified as the guilty to not have the development of
the business in more systematic and appropriate manner.

REFERENCES
Books & Journals
Cabrelli, D., 2016. Liability and remedies for breach of the contract of employment at common
law: some recent developments. Industrial Law Journal. 45(2). pp.207-219.
Hsu, A., 2016. Contracts: A Question of Consideration: Medical Staff Bylaws as an Enforceable
Contract-Medical Staff of Avera Marshall Regional Medical Center v. Avera Marshall.
Mitchell Hamline L. Rev. 42. p.387.
Usanti, T.P. and Roro, F.S.R., 2017. DEFAULT/BREACH OF CONTRACT
CHARACTERISTICS OF MUDHARABAH FINANCING IN SHARIA BANKING.
Journal of Islamic Law Studies, Sharia Journal. 2(3).
Braun, A., 2016. Caution, Herr Buback!“-The Attorney General in the Mist of the Interests of the
Four Powers.
Campbell, A., 2019. Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Australian Egg
Corporation Limited [2017] FCAFC 152. Commercial Law Quarterly: The Journal of
the Commercial Law Association of Australia. 33(1). p.17.
Weatherall, K., 2017. The consumer as the empirical measure of trade mark law. The Modern
Law Review. 80(1). pp.57-87.
Online
Enforceable Contract. 2020. [Online]. Available
through :<https://www.upcounsel.com/enforceable-contract>.
Australian consumer law[Online]. Available through
:<https://consumerlaw.gov.au/sites/consumer/files/2016/05/0553FT_ACL-
guides_Guarantees_web.pdf>