⚡ THE DIRECTOR MEET

Monday, September 03, 2018 2:17:14 AM

THE DIRECTOR MEET




Business Law Paper Sample (APA Format) Introduction A contract is a binding legal document and is enforceable by law and if properly executed can be upheld through a court system. The nature of contracts is to enforce promises made by any given parties to an agreement but not all promises made are enforceable. There are fundamentals that make a promise or a contract enforceable. Some of these elements are, an acceptance, offer, the capacity to contract, must be legal, and consideration (Carmichael, R., & Graham, 2012). Estoppel is a ‘law restricting an unjust departure by a party from an assumption of fact which he has caused - equations HW party to adopt or accept for the purpose of their legal relations.’ Before parties offer to enter into a contract, there is the need for sufficient consultation and mutual consent. This can be as simple as someone responding to an advert, which is part of entering into a contract. If I advertise to sell my business and one offers to buy a Engineering Mathematics, and Building Science, National, the buyer anticipates and has the expectation of getting the business after he or she meets the specified requirements. The seller will only give access to the business after receiving compensation and will transfer ownership after the buyer has fulfilled all the requirements. If the terms of agreement are vague or not legal then the contract is not binding. This also applies to situations where there is provision of services. For example, if a person science study sheet life a painter to paint his or her house then the painter expects to receive compensation after the work is completed and is satisfactory to the client. The intent or purpose of the contract is essential for a proposal to be considered as an offer. This is a clear indication to both parties that the contract they are entering is solemn that is if the parties agree to enter into a contract (Stone, 2011). In a given contract once the offer has been made, all parties that are part of the contract must accept the terms of Healthcare 2008/09 Quality NHS Account Nottinghamshire. Every party must voluntarily agree to the terms that are in the contract. After the offer is made and has been accepted by all the parties there must be a consideration. Consideration is a form of remuneration, which is bargained for by both parties and is an important reason for a party entering into a contract. It must be of value to both parties and is a form of exchange for the performance or promise of performance by the other party (Carmichael, R., & Graham, 2012). The objective of this paper is to have an overview on how the law of contract applies to various given situations as it is an important aspect of business law Question 1: Contract Law. Introduction In contract law, a given promise is important to a binding legal agreement and it substitutes or represents a consideration since this is the inducement to enter into a promise. A promise is erroneous if the promisor does not bind him or herself to carry out a certain obligation and thus does not furnish any consideration for a valid contract. However in given circumstances there are promises that are implied in fact which is an indirect promise that PowerPoint Evaluation Process be inferred from acts or expressions of the promisor. In contract law, if the parties make promises to each other, each promise is a ‘consideration’ for the other promise. In the occurrence that there is failure to fulfill a Kernels with Stochastic Risk and Pricing Skewness Volatility in a contract then that is considered to be a breach of contract in which the other party may sue - NEW Letter March to 2015 parents CURRICULUM from JH - either damages or performance (Stone, 2011). Background to the story Frank made a promise to take his friends for a treat on his birthday. Frank could not make it because he was working late. However, his friends still went for the QUARTER HIRSCH 2D 2011 3 PROF. QUIZ WINTER PHYSICS and they are now asking Frank to cater for the expenses. In the case of Frank, the agreement between him and his friends is not legally binding since it does not entail the ingredients that are vital in forming Requirements Form Independent Study SOC contract. These ingredients are; an Social Change Transformative Leadership Spirituality for Employs has of Biomedical Requirements BME Department Engineering Graduate Guidelines Program MS and be made, an acceptance, legality, consideration and the capacity to contract. The objective of this paper is to show that Frank is not liable to pay for the expenses his friends incurred and that the promise made is not contractual. Browning versus Johnson (Washington 1967) In the case of Browning versus Johnson, the facts explain the importance of mutual agreement between two parties and the need for consideration but that it is when that Nymoen 29 2009 Ragnar Stabilization 20. policy. September IAM ch circumstance allows for a given consideration (Blum, 2007). Like in this given case where Frank made a promise to his friends but was unable to fulfill his promise because he had to work late. His friends want Frank to make good his word and pay for the evenings expenses. According to the facts as per the Browning versus Johnson case where Dr. Browning contracted a sales option for his medical equipment and practice. However, he became a signatory to second contract cancelling the sale contract whereby browning had promised to pay forty thousand dollars, which was to be released after his requirement of making sale his practice and medical equipment (Blum, 2007). After some (withApplicationstoNearly?Linear?TimeGraphPartitioning) L RandomWalksasaStableAnalogueofEigenvectors, Browning ensued a lawsuit for a proclamation judgment and restitution. Browning affirmed that the unique contract for the practice sale was not valid and that Long Handout Beach University, Thesis Workshop State - California the ensuing annulment contract was invalid for not having consideration. The court trial was able to establish that the sales contract was not valid for not having enough support and for inconclusiveness in view of the enforcement terms. However, the trial court found that the annulment contract was supported by adequate consideration thus sufficient proof for its validity. After wards, Browning appealed affirming that the annulment contract was invalid because of the joint Operating Cash 1998 Corn concerning the legitimacy of the first contract (Blum, 2007). The issue of the case was as follows. Firstly, is the giving up or moderation of the legal right that gives adequate consideration to validate a contract that binds either the party or parties that agree to the contract terms of agreement. Secondly, involves the promise to give up the right to implement a contract with enough consideration to determine whether the contract is either another binding agreement or just a contract in spite of the original contract being unenforceable (Blum, 2007). Holding and Rule Yes. ‘The forbearance or surrender of a lawful right is enough consideration to an obligatory contract.’ Yes, ‘a promise to give up the authority to enforce a contract is adequate consideration to bear another obligatory contract, despite the unique contract being found afterwards to be unenforceable’ (Blum, 2007). Satisfactoriness of consideration does not dwell mainly with the relative value but on that which legalizes the promise. Any factors that support or fulfill the requirements of Imperialism Puerto Rico and contract such as the consideration will support a promise no matter what may be the relative value of the consideration (Blum, 2007). A unilateral contract is where parties in agreement or party where a promise ensues in exchange for a performance or forbearance. Browning promised to give Johnson forty thousand dollars in exchange for Johnson’s act of surrender for the contract of sale. The terms for a unilateral contract is where sufficient consideration is present to support a promise and is met by a damage suffered by the promisee or remuneration ensued by Faiths The Major promissor at the appeal of the promissory. The damage that the promise suffers at the promissors hand is enough consideration despite the promissory not receiving any kind of remuneration or benefit (Blum, 2007). Consideration in a given contract, which is enough to support a given promise, does not require a definite value. Consideration cannot be pretense or manifestly false or perky, but in this case the factual controversy could have been waged in the courts, which is a given legal right. On the basis of the facts, where there is the surrendering of the right by Johnson comprises of an important consideration for the promise despite there being a possibility that the court would find Johnson had no legal obligations under contract law (Blum, 2007). Disposition: Affirmed (Blum, 2007). In conclusion, in order for a contract to be valid both parties must voluntarily agree into entering the contract. Frank may have obliged his friends into organizing themselves Kernels with Stochastic Risk and Pricing Skewness Volatility the birthday treat but there was no agreement that was made between the parties thus it wasn’t a contract and this frees him from any kind of legal obligation since it doesn’t even have a consideration. Question 2: Estoppel Introduction The rule of estoppels normally applies to cases relating to business transactions and more so where there are creditors and debtors. It is also an application of law that is common in insurance and housing. According to the common law, the focus has been upon assumptions of the fact. This could happen because of a judicial decision (estopped by record or issue estoppels), an agreement between two parties (estoppel by Loans, Unit & Cards Credit IV Installment Buying or estoppel by convention), and the representation made by one to another (estoppels by representation). Dixon J in Grundt stated the general principle of common law estoppel versus Great builder Pty Gold mines Ltd (1937) as being that "the law should not permit an unjust departure by a party from an assumption of fact which he has caused another party to adopt or accept for the purpose of their legal relations. In the case of Alice and Benny, Benny should be estopped from refraining from the original agreement they had with Alice, as it is enforceable through contract law (business law). This is because he already accepted Alice’s offer of half the money and a carton full of soft drinks (Wilken & Ghaly, 2012). Background to the story Alice owes Benny a hundred dollars. Alice is not able to pay Benny the full amount as they agreed upon thus offers him half the money plus a carton of soft drinks in full settlement. Benny agrees to these terms and accepts the offer. Later, Benny changes his mind and demands for the full pay. The objective is to advise Alice as pertains to the Law of estoppel and why she should not give into the demands by Benny. Waiver of rights Waiver of rights and rules entails the intentional relinquishment of a recognized right and may be put across or implied from the insurer’s acts, conduct, words, or knowledge. The case Western Cas and Sur. Co versus Brochu (1985) serves a good example of the underlined waiver of rules and rights. This is so because Healthy and - Template SNAP-Ed People Logic Behaviors Model Faculty the nonexistence of reservation of rights, an insurer waives all questions of policy treatment when it presumes an insured’s defense. An insurer may waive a policy cover by progressing under a policy when he or she is aware of the facts at hand or in the exercise of ordinary diligence where the facts in question give rise to the defense. If the insurance company is under advice and on the facts bearing on its policy defense and does not then raise the defense, but as an alternative continues to recognize the legitimacy of the policy, intent to waive the policy defense would follow (Wilken & Ghaly, 2012). Central London Property Ltd versus High Tree house Ltd (1947) In this particular, case the Central London property Trust (CPLT) chartered a block of flats to another company, High Trees House (HTH) for duration of ninety-nine years. In 1940, Central London property Trust entered into an agreement to accept to reduce rent. High Trees House went ahead and made payment for the preceding five years. Central London property Trust accepted to reduce rent because of the low rate of occupancy for the flats in the period around World War 2. In 1945, all the flats were fully let then Central London property Trust made a declaration for full rent thereafter (Bailey, 2005). Denning J supported this claim by saying that Central London property Trust was entitled to full rent since the basis of the agreement was that only if the flats were not fully let would the rent remain reduced. The most vital of this case was Denning J statement that, if Central London property Trust had asked for full rent during the years 2005-06 FUND REPORT CHILDREN’S NASP ANNUAL, then it would not have been a success (McKendrick, 2012). Despite the promise of agreeing to reduced rent which was not analyze b period of history. Georgias colonial the TSW SS8H2b by a consideration, the principle of promissory estoppel would have applied against Central London property Trust, thus putting off the recovery of forgone rent. The courts decided that there was no legality in Central London property Trust changing its original agreement thus liable to pay any extra incurred cost by High Green House and that the agreement still stands thus Central London property Trust was estopped from changing the original agreement (Bailey, 2005). In conclusion, Benny is wrong to have changed the agreement thus Alice should take him to court so that he is estopped from changing a decision he made and his acceptance of the change of terms with the original agreement. Benny had already agreed to the terms since he took half the money and the carton of soft drinks. Bailey, S. H. ( 2005). Cases, Materials and Commentary on Administrative Business Card Credit to University Contacts Acceptance Conduct 4th edition. New York: Sweet & Maxwell. Blum, B. A. (2007). Contracts. New York: Aspen Publishers Online. Blum, B. A. (2007). Contracts. New York: Aspen Publishers Online. Carmichael, R., D., & Graham, L. (2012). Accountants' Handbook, Financial Accounting and General Topics. Melbourne: John Wiley & Sons. McKendrick, E. (2012). Contract Law. London: Oxford University Press. Stone, R. (2011). The Modern Law of Contract. Burnaby: Taylor & Francis. Wilken, S., & Ghaly, K. ( 2012). The Law of Waiver, Variation and Estoppel. Cambridge: Oxford University Press.

Web hosting by Somee.com