How Does Equity Fulfill the Common Law Common Law Equity fulfils the common law‚ although it does not endeavour to displace it with a moral code. In order to be influential‚ the law is to be professed as both certain and predictable‚ and also flexible and fair. Specifically‚ it needs clear rules on the one hand‚ but flexibility on the other to produce exceptions to cases that lead to apparently incongruous or unjust conclusions if the rules are
Premium Law Common law Contract
3. Contract Law “Is My Agreement an Enforceable Contract?” The Law of Contract involves answering 4 questions: (1) Is my agreement an enforceable contract? Are all of the elements of a contract present. (2) If so‚ what does it require me (and the other party) to do? - What “promises” have become terms of the contract. (3) Can I get out of it (without paying some form of penalty)? - Was the formation of the contract defective in some way (ie were there any ‘vitiating elements’ present)
Premium Contract
Contract Law – Formative Assessment Alex would be suing Betty for a breach of contract. He would only succeed if he’s able to prove that a contract was in place. A contract can be defined as “a written or spoken agreement that is intended to be enforceable by law.” In order for it to be formed‚ agreement must take place and it can be broken down into two elements. Firstly‚ an offer. This can be described as an expression of willingness to contract on clear terms‚ with the intention that it will
Premium Contract Contract law Common law
Business Law(BL) John is an offeror as he is putting his property out at 2 million and this offer may also be made to the world at large not just individuals or specific groups of people(Carhill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co 1893). After having assessing through the situation of Adam and Bill‚ i would like to touch on assessing Adam’s situation first. In this scenario‚ John was the offeror as he offered 2 million for the house and Adam is the offeree but as Adam was the first viewer of the house
Premium Contract Contract law Invitation to treat
contract but do not appear to be a relevant issue here. While it is possible for offers to be "made to the world”1‚ K ’s advertisement is an "invitation to treat"2. It cannot be construed as an offer as it shows no intention on K ’s part to be bound to its terms‚ in contrast to the wording of the advertisement in Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ba// Co3. Thus A ’s letter to K dated 21 April is the first possibility of an offer. However the terms of this letter are too vague to be construed as an offer
Premium Contract
LAW 203 – LAW OF CONRACT 1 ASSIGNMENT 2 STUDENT ID: S120343 LECTURER/TUTOR: MR HUMPHREY MARAU NUMBER OF WORDS: 2284 Contract law is a body of law that governs oral and written agreements associated with exchange of goods and services‚ money‚ and properties. Not only does contract law set out the rules and guidelines of how to form a contract but also teaches us how the parties to a contract are to fulfil it and what may happen when the terms of a contract are not fulfilled. The background
Premium Contract Law
which binds the parties under normal contract law. If falling under the statutory provision in s.380 (CA 1985)‚ the agreement must be registered in the same way as the memorandum and articles‚ though clauses in the shareholders agreement cannot contravene
Premium Contract Law Company
Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker LAW/421 Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker At what point‚ if ever‚ did the parties have a contract? Chou and BTT reach the point of having a contract when they agree to all terms. In the email send by BTT covering the obligations of the parties and the terms of the agreement‚ BTT showed objective intent. According to Melvin‚” Objective intent Requirement for an offer to have legal effect necessitating that generally‚ the offer or must have a serious intention to become
Premium Contract Common law Contract law
Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker. The parties did have a contract for exclusive negotiation rights as stated in the case scenario. Big Time Toymaker (BTT) paid Chou $25‚000 for a 90-day period of exclusivity‚ thus prohibiting Chou from soliciting or entertaining offers from other parties. The agreement stipulated that unless it was written no distribution contract existed. Prior to the 90-days elapsing‚ the parties reached an oral agreement and BTT sent Chou an e-mail titled “Strat Deal” covering
Premium Contract Contract law
David Cho LAW/421 Week 4 November 19‚ 2014 Dr. Mark Pugatch BS‚ MBA‚ JD Big Time Toymaker According to Melvin‚ 2011 “an agreement may result in a binding contract‚ whether it is an oral or written agreement between parties”. Big Time Toymaker (BTT) had shown interest in the new strategy game developed by Chou‚ called Strat. There were oral agreements for exclusive distribution rights‚ but had stipulations that it must be in writing. There were also emails sent‚ but a formal contract was never
Premium Contract Common law Contract law