Case Study Of The Law On Singapura

1776 Words8 Pages

The law on Singapura comes from the law in the UK. Because Uk and Singapura are common law states. Common law is the system of law which is based on judges' decisions and custom rather than on written rules. This case relates to laws constructed on contract law. More precisely, the agreement, consideration, and intention to have a legal relationship to generate a legally binding contract. In a contract, there are some parties embroiled like buyer and seller. Trading is an essential aspect in achieving joy in life. Trading is a "connection" between people who have need of each other. The business law means juridical, purchase and selling and inclusion into several agreements, facilitate and encourage the sale. accordingly, commercial
…show more content…
Damien met Alan on November 4 and paid off with $ 200 cash, and Alan received the money, but he would authorize the sale on November 7, 2015. On November 7 Damien received his textbook from Alan who did not know that Alan purchased a new book from a bookstore. From the previous case, (Beale v Taylor) the seller plans to sell his car and advertise it as a "twin white Herald convertible caravan, 1961," The buyer has seen the car and bought it. However, they did not realize that the back of the car was the buyer not aware the car was different from the advertised. Finally, the buyer realizes that the car is not in accordance with the actual and he asks for compensation. Alan does not oppose the description that the material to be promised does not accord to the given description which is the textbook and its notes. (Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company) The £ 100 reward will be paid by the Carbolic Smoke Ball Company to who gets catarrh, cough or anything sick caused by coughing, after using this ball three times a day for two weeks following the guidelines that come with each ball. £ 1000 saved with Alliance Bank, on Regent Street, shows our sincerity in this subject. Alan did not bring out the textbook and hand-written on the point but a few days after, Alan bought a new textbook, however, included his notes as well. Hence, Alan did not technically violations the contract as his offer was technically still within the description of his advertisement. In this case Damien sent a message to Alan but Alan was silent not replying to anything. In the Alan agreement does not show will legitimize in acceptance. (Harvey v Facey) Harvey sent a Telegram: "Will you sell us Bumper Hall Pen? Telegraph lowest cash price-answer

    More about Case Study Of The Law On Singapura

      Open Document