_Exam Questions
pdf
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Toronto Metropolitan University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
LAW 122
Subject
Law
Date
Feb 20, 2024
Type
Pages
10
Uploaded by ProfCoyote3988
LAW 122 E- QUESTIONS
1. Madeleine is a world renowned symphony conductor, conducting symphony orchestras
throughout the world. Madeleine has entered into a contract with Northern Lights Concert
Promotion to conduct the Toronto Symphony Orchestra at Roy Thomson Hall, and also
contracted with her record company to record the concert for later release as an album.
Madeleine can apply the same consideration (conducting the Toronto Symphony Orchestra at
Roy Thomson Hall) to both contracts. TRUE or FALSE
If Madeleine has entered into a contract with Northern Lights Concert Promotion to conduct the
Toronto Symphony Orchestra at Roy Thomson Hall, and has also entered into a contract with her
record company to record the concert for later release as an album, she may be able to apply
the same consideration (conducting the Toronto Symphony Orchestra at Roy Thomson Hall) to
both contracts. This is because, in contract law, consideration is the value that is exchanged
between the parties to a contract. In this case, Madeleine's consideration for conducting the
concert is her performance, and this can be applied to both contracts.
2. Ahmed offered to sell his car to Rory for $20,000, payable immediately upon delivery. His
offer included a 6 month full refund period after delivery Rory responded agreeing to pay
$20,000 for the car on its delivery, and with a 12 month full refund period after delivery if the
car had any engine problems. Ahmed delivered the car and Rory paid Ahmed $20,000. The
car encountered serious engine problems nine months after its delivery to Rory, and he has
claimed the cost of repairs from Ahmed under the full refund provision in the contract.
Ahmed disagrees, saying the full refund period has expired.
Rory has a sustainable claim against Ahmed for breach of the full refund period provision in
the contract. TRUE or FALSE
If the facts of the situation are as described, Rory may have a sustainable claim against Ahmed
for breach of the full refund period provision in the contract. This is because, in contract law, an
offer that is accepted without any changes or modifications becomes a binding contract. In this
case, Ahmed's offer included a 6 month full refund period, but Rory accepted the offer with a 12
month full refund period. Since Ahmed did not object to the change in the terms of the
contract, the contract was formed with the 12 month full refund period. If the car encountered
serious engine problems within the 12 month period, Rory would be entitled to claim the cost
of repairs from Ahmed under the full refund provision in the contract. Ahmed's disagreement
would not be valid in this case.
3. Kelly is an avid collector of antique furniture. Her most recent purchase was a mid 19th
century roll-top desk from an antique furniture store for which she paid $50,000. Although
the contract she signed for its purchase did not mention who may have owned it, when
negotiating the purchase price with the store owner, the store owner said that its original
owner was Canada's first Prime Minister, Sir John A. Macdonald. Recently, Kelly had her
collection of antique furniture reviewed by a renowned Canadian political historian, and was
shocked when she said that Sir John A Macdonald never possessed or used a roll-top desk,
and that all of the furniture he possessed or used had been accounted for and was housed in
a museum.
Kelly has a legal claim against the owner of the antique store from whom she bought the
roll-top desk. TRUE or FALSE
If the facts of the situation are as described, Kelly may have a legal claim against the owner of
the antique store from whom she bought the roll-top desk. This is because, in contract law, an
important part of the formation of a contract is the agreement of the parties on the essential
terms of the contract, such as the subject matter and the price. In this case, Kelly's purchase of
the roll-top desk was based on the representation by the store owner that it was originally
owned by Sir John A. Macdonald. If this representation was false and Kelly relied on it when
making the purchase, she may have a claim for misrepresentation against the owner of the
antique store.
4. ABC Inc. is a wholesaler of sweaters. XYZ Corp is a retailer that sells sweaters at retail
stores across the city. On December 1, 2021, ABC Inc. enters into a contract with XYZ Corp.
This is a simple contract that states as follows: "ABC Inc. will deliver 1,000 sweaters to XYZ
Corp's warehouse by January 15, 2022. In exchange, XYZ Corp will pay ABC Inc. $10,000." ABC
Inc. delivers 990 sweaters (10 fewer sweaters than promised under the contract) to XYZ's
warehouse on time on January 15, 2022.
XYZ Corp. is legally entitled to refuse delivery of the sweaters. TRUE or FALSE
(
Not discharge by performance as an exception entire contract clause (in boilerplate clause):
No payment due unless all work performed
)
I: The issue is whether XYZ Corp. is legally entitled to refuse delivery of the sweaters.
R: In contract law, a material breach of contract occurs when one party fails to fulfill a significant
or essential obligation under the contract. In this case, ABC Inc. promised to deliver 1,000
sweaters to XYZ Corp's warehouse by a certain date, but only delivered 990 sweaters. This is a
significant failure to fulfill their obligation under the contract, and could be considered a
material breach of contract.
A: Based on the facts of the situation, it appears that XYZ Corp. may be legally entitled to refuse
delivery of the sweaters. This is because ABC Inc.'s failure to fulfill their obligation to deliver
1,000 sweaters could be considered a material breach of the contract.
5. Akon Medical Supplies Ltd. ("Akon") and Sunrise Retirement Homes Inc. ("Sunrise")
entered into a 5-year contract. The contract states that Akon must supply Sunrise with certain
medical supplies for a fixed price of $2 million per year. During the 5th year of the contract,
the price of medical supplies skyrocketed due to a shortage of raw materials. Akon realized
that it would lose a considerable amount of money if it continued to supply Sunrise at the
original fixed price. Akon explained the situation to Sunrise and asked it to pay an additional
$350,000 for the medical supplies. Sunrise agreed to pay Akon the additional $350,000. Akon
delivered the medical supplies to Sunrise. Sunrise paid $2,000,000 but refused to pay the
additional $350,000.
Sunrise is legally required to pay the additional $350,000 to Akon. TRUE OR FALSE
If the facts of the situation are as described, Sunrise may be legally required to pay the
additional $350,000 to Akon. This is because, in contract law, a contract can be modified if both
parties agree to the changes. In this case, the original contract between Akon and Sunrise stated
that Akon must supply Sunrise with certain medical supplies for a fixed price of $2 million per
year. However, due to a shortage of raw materials, the price of medical supplies increased
significantly, and Akon explained the situation to Sunrise and asked it to pay an additional
$350,000 for the medical supplies. Sunrise agreed to pay the additional amount, and Akon
delivered the medical supplies. Since Sunrise agreed to the change in the terms of the contract,
they may be legally required to pay the additional $350,000 to Akon.
6. Dan drives Ali to a frat party. Dan has smoked way too much marijuana and drank too
many beers. Ali drives Dan home because he knows Dan is too high from the combination of
marijuana and alcohol to drive. Dan doesn't have any money on him, and he is so grateful
that Ali drove him home safely that Dan agrees to sell Ali his $2,000 computer as payment for
the ride. The next morning Dan wakes up with a headache, and realizes that he sold Ali his
$2,000 computer for $20.00. Dan immediately calls Ali to get his computer back, and to repay
him the $20.00 in cash. Ali refuses to return the computer. Dan can void the sale of his
computer to Ali. TRUE or FALSE
In the formation of a contract there are certain aspects that make them voidable such as
intoxication. Since Dan was to drunk to understand what he was doing, and since ali was aware
of the fact that dan was under the influence due to the fact that he drove him for that reason.
Based on these facts Dan can void the contract.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
7. Austin agreed to sell his speedboat to Sandy for $50,000. Sandy made an initial payment of
$25,000, with the remainder to be paid when the speedboat was delivered. Before delivering
the speedboat, Austin's friend Eugene, who sells speedboats for a living, told him that he was
foolish to sell it for such a low price. Eugene said its market value was at least $75,000. Austin
has now refused to deliver the boat to Sandy unless she pays him an extra $25,000.
Sandy refuses and sues Austin for breach of contract. Assuming Austin is in breach of
contract, Sandy is entitled to $50,000 in damages. TRUE or False
If the facts of the situation are as described, and Austin is in breach of contract by refusing to
deliver the speedboat to Sandy unless she pays an extra $25,000, Sandy would not be entitled
to $50,000 in damages. This is because, in contract law, damages are intended to put the
non-breaching party in the position they would have been in if the contract had been
performed. In this case, the contract between Austin and Sandy stated that Sandy would pay
$50,000 for the speedboat, and she has already paid $25,000 of this amount. If Austin is in
breach of contract by refusing to deliver the speedboat, Sandy would be entitled to the
remaining $25,000 that she paid, but not to an additional $50,000 in damages.
In contract law, expectation damages represent the monetary value of the benefit that the
plaintiff is expected to receive under contract. Specifically, the monetary value is defined by the
formula of Expected Benefits - Expected Costs. In this case, since the expected benefits of the
boat is 75k and the costs is worth 25k, the expected damages is approximately 50k. Given this
case, Sandy can sue Austin for 50k in damages for his demands to ask for additional
compensation. (TAN)
8. Judy absentmindedly left her violin in its case on the bus after the Etobicoke Junior
Orchestra practice Sunday evening. Sally who later boarded the bus picked up the violin case
and took it home. Sally left the case on the hall table without opening it. Monday morning,
Judy placed posters at all the bus stops on her bus route with her name and address offering
a $500 reward to anyone who returns her missing violin. On Wednesday, Sally opens the
violin case, sees the violin and a program for the Etobicoke Junior Orchestra noting that Judy
is the violinist. She assumes that the violin belongs to Judy and drives to the Orchestra's
office and leaves the violin with the receptionist for return to Judy. The following Tuesday,
Sally sees the reward poster placed by Judy. She calls Judy (who has by this time received her
violin from the receptionist) and asks for the reward. Statement: Judy is legally obligated to
pay Sally the $500 reward. TRUE or FALSE
False. If the facts of the situation are as described, Judy would not be legally obligated to pay
Sally the $500 reward. This is because, in contract law, a contract is only enforceable if it is
formed by the mutual agreement of the parties, and if it includes the essential elements of a
contract such as offer, acceptance, and consideration. In this case, Judy offered a reward to
anyone who returns her missing violin, but there was no agreement between Judy and Sally
regarding the reward. Sally did not know about the reward when she returned the violin to Judy,
and there was no consideration given by Sally in exchange for the reward. As a result, there is
no enforceable contract between Judy and Sally, and Judy would not be legally obligated to pay
the $500 reward. The offer must perform the stipulated act with the offer in mind
9. Edie, Tariq and Jermaine became close friends while pursuing their MBA. After graduation,
they decided to jointly pursue a business venture for the development and marketing of
advanced wind turbine technology. They verbally agree that each will make an initial
contribution of $50,000 and share equally in the profits and losses of the business. They also
agree that Edie will focus on the day to day administration of the business venture, Tariq on
developing the technology, and Jermaine on obtaining third party financing. They will each
have access to all relevant business information, and all business decisions must be
unanimous. Their joint business venture is legally a Partnership. TRUE or FALSE
If the facts of the situation are as described, Edie, Tariq, and Jermaine's joint business venture
would be legally considered a partnership. In contract law, a partnership is a business venture
that is formed by two or more individuals who agree to share the profits and losses of the
business. In this case, Edie, Tariq, and Jermaine have verbally agreed to make initial
contributions of $50,000 each, and to share equally in the profits and losses of the business.
They have also agreed to specific roles and responsibilities within the business, and have agreed
that all business decisions must be unanimous. These elements are typically found in a
partnership agreement, and as a result, their joint business venture would be legally considered
a partnership.
10. Fiona is an internationally acclaimed ballerina who is contracted to perform in Toronto
with the Canadian Ballet Company. Fiona's appearance with the Canadian Ballet Company is
very important to the success in the sale of tickets for the performance. Two weeks before the
scheduled performance, Fiona informs the Canadian Ballet Company that she will not be
coming. She has decided to take a break from performing. Assuming that Fiona is in breach of
contract, the serious impact on the sale of tickets of her not appearing entitles the Canadian
Ballet Company to specific performance as their remedy. TRUE or FALSE
If the facts of the situation are as described, and Fiona is in breach of contract by not appearing
for the performance with the Canadian Ballet Company, the serious impact on the sale of tickets
would not entitle the Canadian Ballet Company to specific performance as their remedy. In
contract law, specific performance is a remedy that is awarded by a court when monetary
damages are not sufficient to compensate the non-breaching party for the breach of contract. In
this case, the Canadian Ballet Company may be able to claim damages for the lost ticket sales,
but specific performance would not be an appropriate remedy. This is because specific
performance is typically only ordered in cases where the subject matter of the contract is
unique, and it is not possible to award damages that would adequately compensate the
non-breaching party. An exception to specific performance is personal service which is the case
here. In the case of a performance by a ballerina, it would not be possible for a court to order
Fiona to perform, and damages would be the appropriate remedy.
11. Crystal and John take their two children to Julian's Christmas tree farm to select a tree for
the holiday season. There is a notice on the front of the entry ticket they purchased at the
farm in all caps saying "JULIAN'S CHRISTMAS TREE FARM IS NOT RESPONSIBLE OR LIABLE FOR
ANY INJURIES TO GUESTS OR DAMAGE TO PROPERTY, NO MATTER THE CAUSE." There is also
a sign at the entrance to the parking lot, again in large print, with the very same statement.
Unfortunately, while looking for a Christmas tree John tripped over a tree branch carelessly
left on the ground and injured his leg. Julian's Christmas tree farm is legally liable to John for
his injury. TRUE or FALSE
False. It was clearly stated all around Julian's Christmas tree farm and on the ticket that they will
not be liable for any injuries or damage to property. All the signs and notices of liability are in
large print making it noticeable to everybody. However, if John can prove negligence in a case
arising from his injury on unsafe property, the plaintiff must show that the property
owner/occupier failed to act with reasonable care under the circumstances, and that the
plaintiff was injured as a result. When it comes to maintenance and security of property
"reasonable care" usually means repairing all known and readily ascertainable dangers and
giving visitors notice of any non-obvious safety issues. - exclusion clause <-
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
False, the farm will not be liable. This is because they have implemented a exclusion clause
saying that they are not responsible for any liability. Exclusion clauses is a contractual term that
seeks to protect one party from various sorts of activities, and therefore cannot be liable for the
injury.
12. Trent, Ellie and Aiden own and operate a restaurant as a General Partnership. Their
General Partnership Agreement states that "no partner can purchase any supplies or services
for the restaurant for more than $1,000 without the prior approval of the other partners".
Last week, Ellie agreed to the purchase of vegetables for the restaurant from a local farmer
for $2,000 without the knowledge and prior approval of Trent and Aiden. The agreement for
purchase of the vegetables is enforceable.. TRUE or FALSE
False. If the facts of the situation are as described, the agreement for the purchase of
vegetables for the restaurant would not be enforceable. In contract law, a contract is only
enforceable if it is formed by the mutual agreement of the parties, and if it includes the
essential elements of a contract such as offer, acceptance, and consideration. In this case, Ellie
agreed to purchase vegetables for the restaurant from a local farmer for $2,000 without the
knowledge or prior approval of Trent and Aiden. This agreement would not be enforceable
because it did not have the prior approval of the other partners, as required by the General
Partnership Agreement. As a result, the agreement would not be enforceable, and Trent, Ellie,
and Aiden would not be bound by its terms.
13. Rebecca and Maureen contracted with a local banquet hall to host a reception celebrating
their 5th wedding anniversary. The banquet hall is located in a picturesque wooded area. A
week before the reception a tornado tore the roof off the banquet hall. The roof could not be
repaired in time to host the reception, so the banquet hall had to cancel the reception.
Rebecca and Maureen will succeed in their claim for breach of contract against the owners of
the banquet hall. TRUE or FALSE
If the facts of the situation are as described, Rebecca and Maureen would not succeed in their
claim for breach of contract against the owners of the banquet hall. In contract law, a breach of
contract occurs when one party fails to fulfill their obligations under the contract, without a
legal excuse. In this case, the owners of the banquet hall entered into a contract with Rebecca
and Maureen to host their reception, but the banquet hall was unable to fulfill this obligation
due to the damage caused by the tornado. Since the owners of the banquet hall were unable to
fulfill their obligations under the contract due to a natural disaster, they would not be in breach
of contract. the damage was caused by an act of God or other unforeseen event that was
beyond their control.
14. Trent, Ellie and Aiden own and operate a restauraGlobal Forklift Corporation
manufactures forklifts for construction companies. It entered into a distribution contract with
Maple Leaf Forklift Inc. for the rights to the distribution of its forklifts in Canada.The
agreement stipulates that purchasers of forklifts from Maple Leaf Forklift Inc. cannot re-sell
the forklifts to any other party. Hammer and Nails Construction Supplies Company purchased
a dozen forklifts from Maple Leaf Forklift Inc., and subsequently resold all of them to various
construction companies in Ontario. Global Forklift Corporation will be successful in its claim
for breach of contract against Hammer and Nails Construction Supplies Company. TRUE or
FALSE
If the facts of the situation are as described, Global Forklift Corporation would likely be
successful in its claim for breach of contract against Hammer and Nails Construction Supplies
Company. In contract law, a breach of contract occurs when one party fails to fulfill their
obligations under the contract, without a legal excuse. In this case, the distribution contract
between Global Forklift Corporation and Maple Leaf Forklift Inc. stipulated that purchasers of
forklifts from Maple Leaf Forklift Inc. cannot re-sell the forklifts to any other party. Hammer and
Nails Construction Supplies Company purchased a dozen forklifts from Maple Leaf Forklift Inc.,
and subsequently resold all of them to various construction companies in Ontario. By doing this,
Hammer and Nails Construction Supplies Company breached the term of the contract and
breached Global Forklift Corporation's claim for breach of contract. Global Forklift Corporation
would likely be able to claim damages for the breach of contract, unless Hammer and Nails
Construction Supplies Company can show that they were not aware of the terms of the
distribution contract, or that they had a legal excuse for their actions.
15. Shanthi will celebrate her 18th birthday on December 20th. On November 1, 2021,
Shanthi goes shopping and decides to buy a used (2019) Apple MacBook Pro computer at the
local computer store, and signs a contract to purchase the computer for $2000 that she will
pick up on Dec 13th, a week before her birthday. On November 5th, Shanthi sees a newer
Apple MacBook Pro (2021) for the same price as the used 2019 model, and now wants to buy
the new model and cancel the earlier contract. The contract for the 2019 computer is
voidable. TRUE or FALSE
If the facts of the situation are as described, the contract for the purchase of the 2019 Apple
MacBook Pro computer would be voidable by Shanthi. In contract law, a voidable contract is a
contract that is valid and enforceable unless one of the parties to the contract chooses to void
it. In this case, Shanthi entered into a contract to purchase a used 2019 Apple MacBook Pro
computer for $2000, but she subsequently decided that she wanted to buy a newer model
instead. Since she has not yet picked up the computer, she has the right to void the contract and
purchase the newer model instead. The contract for the purchase of the 2019 model would be
voidable by Shanthi, unless the computer store can show that she entered into the contract in
bad faith or with the intent to defraud them.
1
6. Eugene entered into negotiations with his friend Roger to sell his car. After several days of
negotiation, Eugene told Roger that he would sell him the car for $5,000 and this was his final
offer. Roger said he would think it over and get back to Eugene. Nine months later Roger
called Eugene and said he accepted his final offer. Eugene is legally required to sell Roger his
car for $5,000. TRUE or False
If the facts of the situation are as described, Eugene would not be legally required to sell Roger
his car for $5,000. In contract law, an offer is a statement of the terms under which one party is
willing to be bound. In order for a contract to be formed, the offer must be accepted by the
other party. In this case, Eugene made an offer to sell his car to Roger for $5,000, but he stated
that it was his final offer. Nine months later, Roger called Eugene and accepted the offer.
However, since the offer was no longer open, Roger's acceptance would not be considered valid,
and a contract would not be formed. As a result, Eugene would not be legally required to sell
Roger his car for $5,000. - lapse of time, no stated time period then the offer is open for only a
reasonable period
17. Carpenter Carl hires 5 workers to build luxury dog retreats at his client K9 Adventures'
premises. Carl is a devoted Catholic who attends mass every day. One of the workers, Nigel, is
the nephew of Carl's priest, Father James. He only hired Nigel at the request of Father James.
Father James demands that Nigel's wages be double those paid to other workers, and Carl
grudgingly agrees. Carl can legally void the contract with Nigel requiring him to double his
wages. TRUE or FALSE
In contract law, a contract is a legally binding agreement between two or more parties that is
enforceable by law. Once the contract is formed the parties are generally bound by its terms
and conditions unless there is a defect that exists. Unfairness during bargaining is when a
disadvantaged party is pressured into an agreement or placed in n unfair position during the
bargaining process. Carl was pressured into hiring Nigel and paying him double wages due to
the influence he had by Father James as he was deemed a very holy person in the eyes of carl a
devoted Catholic.
“Specifically if you want something from the definition, I’d say this is a fiduciary relationship
The priest holds some dominance over the other person”
Undue influnce
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
18. On Monday, John puts an add on Kijiji (on-line buying/selling site) offering to sell his
Textrix 2500 laptop "as is" for $1000. Tuesday morning, John meets Bill who is also going to
university. John mentions to Bill that he wants to sell his Textrix 2500 for $1000 "as is". Bill
replies that he will pay John $900 for the Textrix 2500 if John also includes the carrying case
for free. John says "yes" and shakes hands with Bill. Bill and John agree to meet the next day,
Wednesday, to deliver the Textrix 2500. John goes home and checks his emails. Monday
evening he received an email from Peter who says "John, saw your Kijiji ad and agree to buy
your Textrix 2500 for $1000. Let's meet Tuesday night and I will pay you the money and get
the laptop." John is legally obligated to sell the Textrix 2500 and carrying case to Bill for $900.
TRUE or FALSE
In contract law, a contract is formed when there is intention, offer, acceptance and
consideration. In this case, the deal between Bill and John goes through all the stages up until
consideration. Since there is no consideration given during the life of this contract, there is no
legal obligation on John’s part and he is free to act however he pleases. Although, it would be
very unethical for him to do this.