Tullula Investments Ltd is a large South Australian company‚ which owns and operates many hotel and restaurants throughout Australia. Italian Cuisine Ltd‚ a food and catering business whose headquarters are in Brisbane‚ supplies goods commonly used by businesses such as Tullula Investments Ltd. On September 1‚ 2000‚ Italian Cuisine Ltd sent a fax to Tullula Investments Ltd‚ which read: "Can offer latest ’Speedy Rice Cookers’ at $100 each." On October 1‚ 2000‚ Tullula Investments Ltd faxed a reply
Premium Marketing
Canny Gabrial Castle v Volume Sales(p200): Canny Gabrial argued that the 2 companies were joint ventures Decision: Agreement was partnership Polkinghorne v Holland(p205): Was the giving of financial advice outside the ordinary business of the law firm‚ such that the partners would be jointly liable Decision: Held that the firm was liable for the actions of hollan’s son Lec 5 Chap 13 Balfour v Balfour(256): At the time of the agreement‚ did the parties intend the arrangement to be anything
Premium Contract
CASES ON BANKING LAW Westminster Bank Ltd v. Hilton (1926) 43 TLR 124 As against the money of the customer’s in the banker’s hands the relationship between banker and customer is that of principal and agent: "It is well established that the normal relation between a banker and his customer is that of debtor and creditor‚ but it is equally well established that quoad the drawing and payment of the customer’s cheques as against money of the customer’s in the banker’s hands the relation is that
Premium Bank Contract Money
Case – British Railways board Vs Herrington Relevance - Trespasser duty of care - Common humanity - Occupiers liability act 1984 Facts - Railway line operated by BRB ran through property open to public - Fences were in poor repair - 1965 children seen on line - Child severely injured when he stepped on line after passing through broken fence - Plaintiff claimed damages for negligence Ruling - House of lords held over trespassers‚ a duty to take steps as common humanity to avert
Premium Tort law Tort Law
sought to be resolved in the present case involving the application for admission to the Philippine Bar of Vicente D. Ching. The facts of this case are as follows: Vicente D. Ching‚ the legitimate son of the spouses Tat Ching‚ a Chinese citizen‚ and Prescila A. Dulay‚ a Filipino‚ was born in Francia West‚ Tubao‚ La Union on 11 April 1964. Since his birth‚ Ching has resided in the Philippines. On 17 July 1998‚ Ching‚ after having completed a Bachelor of Laws course at the St. Louis University in
Premium Philippines Election Filipino language
BACKGROUND DISCUSSION In this section‚ you would state or discuss any properties of matter‚ laws of nature‚ or structure of matter that is relevant to the experiment that you will be doing. SAMPLE CALCULATIONS/EQUATIONS Sample calculations and or general chemical equations that are relevant to the experiment are included in this part. They can be done in blue or black ink. PROCEDURE In most cases the procedure will be given to you in a usable format and it will not have to be rewritten.
Premium Chemistry Scientific method Qualitative research
Cruzan v. Director‚ Missouri Department of Health U.S. 261 (1990) was a United States Supreme Court case argued on December 6‚ 1989 and decided on June 25‚ 1990. In a 5-4 court decision‚ the court found in favor of the Missouri Dept. of Health. The court affirmed the ruling of the Supreme Court of Missouri. However‚ it upheld the legal standard that competent persons are able to exercise the right to refuse medical treatment under the Due Process Clause and its implied right to privacy. Because
Free Supreme Court of the United States United States Constitution United States
Contract Law Cases The Offer Meeting of minds: Clarke v Earl of Dunraven and Mount Earl: Yacht races. Letters sent in Communication (in writing‚ speech and conduct): Carlil v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co: pay back 100 if you get influenza. Deposit 1000 The Acceptance: Strictly in response to
Premium Contract
Michael Sanchez NS4874 CMGT 3280-01 Homework #1 Slavin v. Borinstein (1994) The issue in this case is between the plaintiff‚ Leon Slavin‚ and the defendant‚ Joan W. Borinstein. Slavin is suing Borinstein over a dispute that erupted over payments on a construction project that were not received; on a project Slavin was building for Borinstein. Borinstein and her people agreed to pay Slavin 10 percent of the cost on a house they wanted to build in Los Angles. They would make the payments in
Premium Contract
Cases in Canadian Law Dehghani v. Canada: The appellant‚ a citizen of Iran‚ arrived in Canada on May 13‚ 1989‚ and claimed refugee status. After being questioned in the primary examination line‚ he was referred to a secondary examination‚ which involved a long wait‚ and‚ as he did not speak English‚ an interpreter was provided for him. At the secondary interview‚ the appellant omitted significant facts. This case involves two issues that are worthy of analysis‚ as he claims‚ first of all‚ that
Premium Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Supreme Court of the United States Canada