Holmes Institute HI6027: Business and Corporate Law Case Study Report

This assignment presents two case studies in business and corporate law. The first case study explores contract law principles, specifically focusing on offer, acceptance, and revocation within the context of a promotional competition by a restaurant chain. It examines the formation of a unilateral contract and the consequences of a printing error leading to the revocation of an offer before acceptance. The second case study delves into corporate law, examining the duties and responsibilities of company directors, particularly in relation to care, diligence, and good faith as outlined in the Corporations Act 2001. It analyzes a scenario where a director may have breached their duties by exceeding transaction limits and failing to act with the required level of diligence. The analysis considers potential liabilities and consequences for the director, as well as the impact of the director's actions on the company's financial dealings and obligations. The assignment demonstrates the application of relevant legal principles and their implications in business contexts.

Contract Law
Name of the student
Name of the university
Author Note

Case study 1:
Application:
 The contract is based on agreement that supplies the conditions and terms that is
necessary to be accomplished by the contractual parties.
 When an offer is accepted without any condition by the contractual parties to the
opposite party where the contract is produced it helps in the creation of the valid
contract.
 Invitation to an offer is a type of invite made to get the response from the public
making an offer where they involve the negotiations.
 Revocation of the offer can be considered when the offer is withdrawn back by the
contractual parties making the offer.
 This only happens when there is a cancellation of the offer made by the party.
 Another type of offer is observed where it explains when an offer is accepted by the
method of carrying out a performance is popularly known as unilateral contract.

Application:
 The provided case depicts the given scenario of SOO Burgers, the chain of the restaurant
started a selling competition for acceleration of the business.
 In this consequence ran the competition by attaching a token with the wrapper of the
burger and the condition of the restaurant chain was that if one can collect 50 tokens will
receive a scratch card
 The one who will win in the scratch card, if revealed a Mazda vehicle, the winner will get
a car that will be provided by the main office of SOO Burgers.
 Michael an consumer was keen for winning the car. Therefore he bought willingly fifty
burgers and ate all the burgers at a time.
 On the consequence of finishing the burgers at a time made him admitted to the clinic
because of being exhausted.
 He scratched 50 tokens for receiving a scratch card as he was about to passout.

 The restaurant organization found out a printing mistake which resulted to a revocation
of the offer the organization announced that the offer will be void.
 The restaurant organization found out a printing mistake which resulted to a revocation
of the offer the organization announced that the offer will be void.
 Therefore successful revocation of the order took place as the news for the void offer
announcement reached him before the offer was accepted. As a result Mickey will not be
able to claim.
Conclusion:
 From the facts concluded from the above mentioned provision of the contract law it is
clear that Mickey will not be able to claim Mazda from the unit of SOO burgers.

Case study 2:
Application:
 Directors must make use of their controls or power, and at the same time, should
perform their responsibilities and duties or role with the top interest along with moral
faith of the company wholly.
 The main focus of the director’s duty is to perform in an honest manner for the well
being of the organisation as per their belief.
 The essential behaviour needed for conducting a duty, hinges on the circumstances of
the organisation along with the position and responsibility of that particular director.
 Directors must make use of their power and control, and at the same time they should
perform their responsibilities and roles along with enough care and diligence that a
reasonable person should focus on.
 At the same time if they perform a similar role as a director of the particular company
occupying a similar organisation.

 All the directors should themselves set up for meeting the lowest standard of the goal or
objective.
 The behaviour of the director should not be taken into consideration because of the
absence of skill and experience.
 The Corporation Act of the year 2001 u/s 180 handles with care and diligence on the
director’s performance.
 Under the provision of the Corporation Act section 181 says that good faith and proper
purpose if breached can hold a director to be liable personally.
 The director formulate the strategies and approves the plan for the business that set the
goal of the company.
 They plan for the annual budget of the company and decides the key management for
the successful running of the company.
 The directors also think about the management’s performance and monitors the result of
the particular business.

Application:
 The consequence of this legal case can be suggested that the performance of Sarah as a
director is bad in the eye of law.
 She has not accomplished any obligations and duties, along with care and diligence.
 . She may be held guilty in the provision of the Corporation Act 2001 u/s 180 and u/s
181.
 She can be penalized up to $200,000. She can be imprisoned up to five years. She can be
debarred form organisation management .
 She can be held liable for paying the debts of the company as her own liability.
 Sarah as a director has breached her duty by transacting beyond the limit without any
support from the director’s board or without the reference from the director’s board.

 The result would be similar as the organisation has provided the limit of transaction
of $30,000 in the favour of the company’s director
 Even if an amount of loan was refurbished for the other two clothing shop of
Sparkling.
 The result of the provided case would not be the same if the officer of the loan
department would have noted about the expiration of Sarah’s appointment.
 She has exceeded the transaction limit as specified by the organisation.
 It was not noted by the loan officer that Sarah was finding a fresh job.
 She was finding a new job because expiration of her appointment in the position of a
director.

• Costello Bank would not lend $30,000 in favour of Sarah if they were aware
of the contractual limit.
• The terms of the contract provided by the company to Sarah as the director of
the organisation.

Conclusion:
 From the above facts, it has been proved that Sarah has not legally performed
the liabilities and the duties of the director with care and diligence.
 It cannot be uttered that Sarah was a reasonable and good director of the
organisation.