Acceptance □ Consideration □ Intention to be legally bound ← Consideration P.29~31 ← Past consideration P.32~33 ← Promise to perform existing obligations P.34~36 ← Part payment of a debt P.37 ← Doctrine of promissory estoppel P41~43 ← Void and Voidable contracts P.56~57 ← Misrepresentation P.67~74 □ Fraudulent □ Negligent □ Innocent □ Consequences of misrepresentation □ Misrepresentation and exemption clauses Lecture 4 – Discharge
Free Common law Law Tort
completion of the account ”. The decision to accept the money would not normally be binding in contract law‚ and afterwards the builders sued the Rees for the outstanding amount. The Rees claimed that the court should apply the doctrine of equitable estoppel‚ which can make promises binding when they would normally not be. However‚ Lord Denning refused to apply the doctrine‚ on the grounds that the Rees had taken unfair advantage of the builders’ financial difficulties‚ and therefore had not come with
Premium Common law Contract
apply to a forgery.”97 This statement has been regarded as a dictum‚ as the case was decided on the principle that the secretary did not have actual or implied authority to represent that a forged document was genuine and‚ therefore‚ there was no estoppel against the company. Hence‚ a general statement that “the Turquand rule” does not apply to forgeries is not exactly warranted by the present authorities. Thus‚ for example‚ Andrews R. Thompson‚98 writing in an extensive article on the subject‚ says:
Premium Corporation Limited liability company Forgery
MERRILL LYNCH FUTURES‚ INC. VS. COURT OF APPEALS‚ SPOUSES PEDRO M. LARA AND ELISA G. LARA G.R. No. 97816 July 24‚ 1992 NARVASA‚ C.J.: FACTS: Merrill Lynch Futures‚ Inc. filed a complaint against the Spouses Pedro M. Lara and Elisa G. Lara for the recovery of a debt and interest thereon‚ damages‚ and attorney’s fees. In its complaint ML FUTURES alleged the following: that it entered into a Futures Customer Agreement with the defendant spouses‚ in virtue of which it agreed to act as the latter’s broker
Premium Futures contract Commodity market Corporation
Rick Marcello Prof. Frey Sport Law SPMG 336 Chapter 4 1. What are the benefits of using a worst case scenario approach in drafting contracts? The benefits of using a worst case scenario include protecting the interests of the organizations in case of a breach of contract. 2. Explain the concepts of agreements‚ consideration‚ capacity‚ and legality in formation of contracts. A) An agreement consists of an offer and acceptance. An offer to sell equipment for $300 is a communication of
Premium Contract Law Common law
Law and Equity Essay (a) Outline the development of common law and equity. There was no system of law in England and Wales before 1066‚ as it was mainly based on customs which were just rules of behaviour and the other used to be the decisions of judges. The law in England and Wales built over the centuries. There were various methods of creating laws which were called “sources of law”. However‚ in the 18th Century Parliament became more powerful which lead the Acts of Parliament (statues) to
Premium Common law Law
COMMERCIAL LAW MODULE 2 TUTORIAL QUESTIONS QUESTION 1 Pete buys a bottle of suntan lotion from his local chemist shop. The lotion which is manufactured by Barnetts Pty Ltd‚ had acid in it‚ which had been added to the mixture by one of the workers in the factory who had failed to read the label on the tin properly. When Pete applied the suntan lotion he suffers third degree burns and has to pay high medical and hospital expenses. Advise Pete whether he has a claim against the manufacturer
Premium Contract Tort Duty of care
SEMESTER 1: 2014/2015 LXEB 3110 EQUITY I ASSIGNMENT NAME: GOH POI SZE MATRIC NUMBER: LEB120033 TUTOR: DR USHARANI A/P BALASINGAM DATE OF SUBMISSION: 3 NOVEMBER 2014 1. Introduction Maxims of equity are short statements that contain the essence of equity law. These maxims were developed over the years and today are used as a set of general principles which are said to govern the way in which equity operates. They illustrates the standards of morality in judicial decision making1 and
Premium Contract Injunction
1. What makes a publicly held corporation different from a public corporation? a. 0 A publicly held corporation has had an IPO‚ and has many private shareholders rather than being a corporation owned by a governmental entity. b. 0 A publicly held corporation is entitled to limited liability‚ but the public corporation is not. c. 0 A publicly held corporation must have a charitable purpose‚ but a public corporation need not have a charitable purpose d. 0 They are two terms that have the same meaning
Premium Corporation Contract Public company
UNIT 6 6.0 AGENCY 6.1 AN AGENT An agent is one who acts on behalf of another called the principal‚ with the express or implied authority of that person. Hence an agent incurs neither rights nor liabilities on contracts made on behalf of the principal. Also an agent need not be of full contractual capacity meaning that even a minor could be appointed as such‚ even though he principal has to be of full contractual capacity. 6.2 TYPES OF AGENTS Universal: appointed to handle the
Premium Bank