a memorandum addressing the following matters in detail‚ and including relevant case law to support your arguments: What are Buyer ’s potential claims against Seller? What are Seller ’s potential defences? Who is likely to prevail in the event this case goes to court? Assume Buyer prevails in his lawsuit against Seller. What damages is Buyer likely to receive from the court? SUMMARY AND RELEVANT FACTS In this case Buyer is plaintiff whereas Seller is defendant. October 1: Buyer saw courier
Premium Contract Breach of contract Law
contract who is of age of majority according to law to which he is subject‚ and who is of sound mind‚ and is not disqualified from contracting by any law to which he is subject.” It means that the following three categories of persons are not competent to contract. 1. A person who has not attained the age of majority‚ i.e.‚ one who is minor. 2. A person who is of unsound mind 3. A person who has been disqualified from contracting by some law. Although the above mentioned categories of
Premium Contract
University of Phoenix | Article/Case Law Search Paper | Tuberculosis-Critical Regulatory Issue | | | July 19‚ 2010 Article/Case Law Search Paper A critical regulatory issue in health care is a really broad subject and will always be discussed and debated on. According to The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention‚ “TB is an airborne‚ communicable disease caused by infection with the bacterium Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Infection occurs typically when a person inhales microscopic
Premium Tuberculosis Public health
2nd of feb CASES MALLIK V BCC: Malik and Mahmud v Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA [1997] UKHL 23 is a leading English contract law and UK labour law case‚ which confirmed the existence of the implied term of mutual trust and confidence in all contracts of employment. Facts: Mr Malik and Mr Mahmud both worked for the Bank of Credit and Commerce International. BCCI went insolvent due to massive fraud‚ connection with terrorists‚ money-laundering‚ extortion and a raft of other criminal
Premium Contract Breach of contract
Article/Case Law Search Ngozi Ofolomah HCS/430 February 4‚ 2013 Vanessa Williams Article/Case Law Search The aftermath of the 9/11 in 2001‚ has left the United States of America in frenzy. It is this particular event that has been devastating to our nation and unforgettable. Furthermore‚ stressing the importance of the safety and health of the general public. September 11‚ has caused federal and state governments to merge public health and public safety into one. This merger brought about
Premium Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution Supreme Court of the United States United States Constitution
existed between them‚ HELD: Although Philippine labor laws and jurisprudence define clearly the elements of an employer-employee relationship‚ this is the first time that the Court will resolve the nature of the relationship between a television and radio station and one of its “talents.” There is no case law stating that a radio and television program host is an employee of the broadcast station. Applying the control test to the present case‚ we find that SONZA is not an employee but an independent
Premium Employment
1 LS 220 Constitutional Law ASSIGNMENT ONE ‘ADVISE THE MP ON THE LEGALITY‚ IN PARTICULAR‚ THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE MIGRATION BILL 2014.’ UNIT CO-ORDINATOR: DR OTTAVIO QUIRICO WORD COUNT: 1925 I INTRODUCTION The proposed Migration Bill (hereafter referred to as the Bill) raises a number of issues that must be analysed in order to ascertain the constitutionality of the proposals within the Act. The main considerations arise from sections 180‚ and 181 which state ‘that an officer must detain
Premium Law United Kingdom Human rights
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
Facts of Solomon v Solomon Solomon was a leather merchant who converted his business into a Limited Company as Solomon & Co. limited (the ‘company’). The company so formed consisted on Solomon‚ his wife and five of his children as members. The company purchased the business of Solomon for £39‚000; the purchase consideration was paid in terms of £10‚000 debentures conferring a charge over the company’s assets‚ £20‚000 in fully paid‚ £1 share each and the balance in cash. The company in less than
Premium Corporation Limited liability
Mr Shafron was not a member. Finally‚ Mr Shafron argued that if he was an officer (on either basis)‚ he had‚ in any event‚ not breached his duties in relation to either the ASX issue or the actuarial issue. 2. RELEVANT LAW FOR DECISION MAKING The relevant law relied on by the judge in making the decision was under section 180(1) of the Corporations Act which provides that directors and other officers of a corporation must exercise the powers and duties provided to them with the degree
Premium Corporation Appeal Decision making