Contact Law Case Study: Questions and Answers
Issue 1: Emma, a manager of Shocks Are the US, had suggested Richard purchase four shock absorber adapters for his jeep's off-road driving at the cost of $480. But, the jeep of Richard met with an accident when he took his vehicle for a test drive after installation of adapters. The crash of jeep incurred damage of $2000. So, the question arises who would be liable for the loss. On the other hand, would Richard be liable for any compensating?
Issue 2: George has provided rent for a premise at the cost of $5000 per month to Richard. In a gap of six months, the rent of the premise is supposed to be increased by 10%. George has agreed and permitted to Richard for not been able to pay an incremented rent for the month of June due to low income from Richard's own business. But, in June 2017, George gave a call to Richard and demanded $4300 extra from Richard. George did not agree to any verbal; contract and lease paper specification would be held. A breach of contract might be considered in this case.
Issue 3\ In another case, Richard has discarded an offer of Tom of $18500 initially and demand for $19000. Richard agreed to a previous offer when Tom was unable to make payment of amount demanded by him. Accordingly, Tom does not accept the car bought by Richard to have place neither agreed to pay any amount.
Issue 4: In the month of August, Martin looks after Richards’s; Martin has been permitted to borrow the car for a while without any payments. However, Richard’s said the car had gone on hire when Martin came to pick up the car. There has been a breach of contract as per Martin.
Section 18 A of Contracts Act 1999 and section 14 of Sales of Goods Act 1979, an oral commitment could be stated as a contract (Contract Disputes - John Antell – Barrister, 2017). Such contracts are equally punishable if breached like a written contract. An example of Air Studios (Lyndhurst) Limited T/A Entertainment Group vs Lombard North Central (2012), the damaged mount of $2000 is liable to be paid by Shock on US company. Richard can be liable to get the compensation amount as per the word of mouth law if there is written documented presented by him.
In the second case, from the reference of Thomas KELLOGG v Cindy SHUSHEREBA (2013), an alleged amount is forcefully paid by Oren '(Findlaw's Supreme Court of Vermont Case and Opinions, 2018). According to section 18 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, Richard is forceful to make payment of $3000; if George approaches court and claims, there was no wave off given. However, if Richard is able to place a witness for oral communication with George, the amount to be paid by Richard might be reduced.
In the third case, with reference to Uber v Aslam, the employment tribunal did not make a stand in front of an appeal made by drivers of Uber. The case highlights the consideration of the issue of pre-booked products. Tom did not enter into a written agreement or contract with Richard. The Product liability and Safety law it is necessary to put a contract with a buyer while confirming a purchase. As this was not done, Richard’s appeal for contract breach might be rejected if he proceeds to court.
The case of Bolton v Mahadeva (1972), the complainant received the amount mentioned in contract deducting the damaged amount (Bolton V Mahadeva 2018). Likewise, Martin can appeal that Richard has not kept his commitment. However, the judge might rule out to solve the disagreement among them for the complainant and the accuser.
In the first case, the Sales of Goods Act 1979 and Contracts Law 1999 might be referred and used. The Contract Law (section 3) 1999, she could be saved by the promissory element of the case. But, with an indication of Contract Law (section 2) 1999, the third party of the case Richard may appeal for the liability of loss he has suffered should be entirely blamed to Emma. Section 8 and section 5 of the similar law also may be applicable for this case. In that case, Emma would have higher chances to win the case.
The second case can take suggestions from the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (article 3A), a written notice about the financial status would have been presented by Richard to his owner. Since, Richard has not been able to present any written document about the wave off of George, the case likely to go in favour of the landlord. The contract law of the UK does not consider a word of the mount as unconditional agreement, which can be related to the third case of Tom have not agreed to make any payment. So, bringing the car at the doorstep of Tom is completely liable to Richard. In the case of Martin, for a consumer credit judge can be considered a verbal communication as an agreement or contract. The verbal conversation between Martin and Richard might be considered a strong case if Martin approaches the court. However, the case is not considered a severe or serious act of breach; it might be a rightful decision of the court to solve the dispute between Martin and Richard by themselves out of the court.
The study analyzed by our contracts law assignment help experts focused on different case scenarios, which has been presented, discussed and solved with reference to different acts under British law. Different laws and acts have been presented to understand each of the case and the proper verdict has also been justified in according to different sections of the law. There were some old solved cases has also been used for referring and justifying the verdict of each case given, Under the cases discussed, the primary laws such as English contract law, Sales of Goods law, customer protection law, Landlord and Tenant law has been used to understand and solve the presented cases. Also, possible court scenarios are also highlighted for the cases if the complainant approaches the court of law. Apart from this solution you can get professional law assignment help from our experienced experts in any area and field of law studies.
'Contract Disputes - John Antell - Barrister' (Johnantell.co.uk, 2018) accessed 3 December 2017
Air Studios (Lyndhurst) Ltd (T/A Air Entertainment Group) V Lombard North Central Plc  EWHC 3162 (QB) (09 November 2012)' (Bailii.org, 2018) accessed 14 November 2017
'Findlaw's Supreme Court Of Vermont Case And Opinions.' (Findlaw, 2018) accessed 15 November 2017
Bolton V Mahadeva' (E-lawresources.co.uk, 2018) accessed 9 November 2017
Private Renting - GOV.UK' (Gov.uk, 2018) accessed 30 November 2017
Electronic Law Journals - JILT 2002 (2) - Desai Et Al' (Warwick.ac.uk, 2018) accessed 17