a) What arguments could Chen use to support his refusal to pay John more than the original agreed price? A valid contract that is legally enforceable should consist of an offer, an acceptance, an intention to be bound and a sufficient consideration. Accordingly, the first contract formed by Chen and John includes John’s agreement to build for Chen extension of the house in consideration of payment of the price of building materials as per the date of completion of performance of the contract and labor costs of $6000 at the performance of the contract. First and foremost Chen needs to understand that this was the original contract and both him and John were legally bounded by the contract. By changing the terms of agreement, John made a counter offer a fact that Chen could use in his justification for refusal of payment. This is evident as John proposed a new term in the contract by demanding a payment of $10,000 or not doing the job as agreed in the original contract. A counter offer changes the terms of the original contract and at this time Chen had the right he terminate the contract due to John’s counter offer. As a matter of fact, it is worth noting that a counter offer fails to exist if the offeree accepts the new terms of the contract as Chen did but Chen can use it to argue that John had no intention to be bound by the original contract (Koffman and Mcdonald, 2007). Duress occurs in a contract when one party is made to engage in a contract that he otherwise did not want to engage in due to blackmails, threats of bring actual harm, and threats of withdrawal from the contract at the time it is urgently needed. The two types of duress currently existing is physical duress and economic duress and Chen can use econ... ... middle of paper ... ...n argue that failure of his completion of the contract in time was out of circumstances that he could not control. In addition, John can argue that the breach of the term of completion of the building at June was contributed by Chens’s reluctance of acceptance of the second offer. References Books Adams, A. (2010). Law for Business Students. London, U.K : Longman Koffman, L. & MacDonald, E., (2007) The Law of Contract (6th Edition) : Oxford University Press, McKenDrick, E. (2005). Contract Law Text,. Cases and Materials (2nd Edition): Oxford University Press, Cases Bank of Australia Limited v Amadio (1983) 151 CLR 447 Goldsbrough Mort & Co Ltd v Quinn (1910) 10 CLR 674, Integrated Computer Services Pty Ltd v Digital Equipment Corp (Aust) Pty Ltd (1988) 5 BPR 11,110). Smith v William Charlick [1924] 34 CLR 38 The Mihalis Angelos [1970] 3 WLR 601
Maria had spoken with Eva over the phone concerning the correct total amount of $60,000 for rendering decorating services provided by Eva. Maria had sent a letter of the telephone conversation stating that Eva agreed to take $60,000 in full satisfaction obligation under the contract. Although Eva, changed her mind when depositing the check in the bank, she legally entered a mutual agreement over the telephone where it resulted in a unliquidated debt, payment is lower than actual.
In the case or Yost v. Rieve Enterprises, Inc. Rieve Enterprises engages into a contract with Mr. Yost for a lease to purchase deal. The facts of the case are that Rieve visited the Red Barn Barbecue Restaurant with the intention of purchasing. Rieve and Mr. Yost entered into a contract after Rieve conducted a visual inspection of the premises. The deal was to include a five year lease with the option to buy the land and building. Prior to the sale, the Red Barn had been cited for numerous health code violations. Mr. Yost had these all corrected and disclosed this information. Mr. Yost then warranted that “the premises will pass all inspections” to conduct business. Shortly after Rieve Enterprises
Phillip Clarke and Julie Clarke, Contract Law Commentaries, Cases and Perspectives, (Oxford University Press, 2nd ed, 2012) 432-3.
A person should not be held to a contract if he or she entered such contract due to a threat or pressure that was put on them. The doctrine of duress in common law covers this issue while in equity it is dealt with by the doctrine of undue influence. Economic duress has had, as McKendrick says, a ‘’somewhat chequered career’’ and being ‘’bedevilled by conceptual confusion’’ . Previously, actual physical violence or threats of physical violence must have been imposed on the individual themselves and the courts recognised such acts to the weaker party as an excuse for avoiding a contract however, the doctrine of duress has become much more expansive throughout the years. A series of English cases from as early as 1731 established the common law doctrine of duress of goods and introduced that money paid under economic compulsion could be recoverable, but the idea of actually setting aside a
Having evaluated the current state of English contract law, mainly made up of piecemeal solutions, it can be seen that despite being satisfactory and doing its job, there still remain gaps within the law of contract where unfairness is not dealt with. Moreover, due to the ad hoc nature of those piecemeal solutions, the latter have often produced inconsistent justice and have manifested cases of unfairness. Hence, “a relatively small number of respected Justices have endeavored to draw attention to the fact that the application of a general principle might be useful and even necessary in English law.”
The court refused to help Campbell in enforcing its legal contract because “the court felt the contract was extremely one-sided. [ Also], it was wrong for Campbell to ask for the court’s help in enforcing this unconscionable bargain (one that “shocks the conscience of the court”)” (Rogers,
The conclusion that could apply for Richardson’s refusal to pay the bill could be that she never agreed to the work for the water pipe to be replaced, she was never informed that the water pipe needed to be replaced. She could have also argued that the work was not necessary at the time, or the bill was not a reasonable price and was too high for the work that was
The first problem with the renegotiation of this contract was the projected demand for VCM creating a “buyers market”, according to the textbook, “the demand was high, but the supply was to increase exponentially” (Lewicki, Saunders, and Barry 2010) Reliant was already locked into a five year contract with Pacific Oil, but there would be stiff competition at the expiration of the that contract. Knowledge of this market situation put Reliant in a position of leverage and trapped Pacific Oil into a desperate sign at all costs scenario. Gaudin and Fontaine assumed that even with a fluctuation with price; Reliant would sign a new because of their established relationship Pacific Oil. Gaudin and Fontaine’s assumption opened themselves up to more concessions by not attaching conditions to the price adjustment. They could have countered with a reduction of the formula price on the condition of contract length.
This case mentioned below is a fine example of understanding the Law of Contract in a better manner. (Gerald, 2014).
The old common law had a doctrine of absolute contract under which contractual obligations were binding no matter what might occur (Paradine v Jane, 1647). In order to ease the hardship which this rule caused in cases where the contract could not be properly fulfilled through no fault of either party but due to occurrence of unforeseen events, the doctrine of frustration was developed.
Friend, Celeste. "Social Contract Theory [Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Hamilton College, 15 Oct. 2004. Web. 01 Oct. 2011. .
James G. Skakoon, W. J. King and Alan Sklar (2007). The Unwritten Laws of Business. /: Tantor Media.
E.G. Lorenzen, Causa and Consideration in the Law of Contracts (1919). Faculty Scholarship Series. Paper 4560.
A contract is an agreement between two parties in which one party agrees to perform some actions in return of some consideration. These promises are legally binding. The contract can be for exchange of goods, services, property and so on. A contract can be oral as well as written and also it can be part oral and part written but it is useful to have written contract otherwise issues can be created in future. But both the written as well as oral contract is legally enforceable. Also if there is a breach of contract, there are certain remedies for that which are discussed later in the assignment. There are certain elements which need to be present in a contract. These elements are discussed in the detail in the assignment. (Clarke,
Martine, Elizabeth A., Jonathon, Law. (2006) Oxford Dictionary of Law, 6th Ed, Oxford University Press.