LAW OF COMMERCE ASSIGNMENT

docx

School

Swinburne University of Technology *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

20019

Subject

Law

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by JudgeMole1453

Advise Alvin as to his legal rights, including whether he may terminate the contract for any breach(es) of clauses 5 and/or 6! If Alvin is able to terminate the contract, if Belle broke the contract by delivering the pinball machines late, if she broke the contract by supplying pinball machines that were not in good working order, if Alvin is entitled to damages, and if she breached the contract by supplying pinball machines that were not in good working order. These are the overall main issues in this case. And the answer to your question is that Alvin is within his rights to terminate the contract due to the breach of clauses 5 and 6, for the following reasons: Firstly, there is no question that there is a contract formed and that there is an acceptance. Acceptance takes place when the terms of the offer are accepted by the offeree, resulting in an agreement. It needs to be understandable, unmistakable, and unambiguous. It is necessary for there to be a decisive act (which may be overtly stated or may be inferred from behaviour) that is wholly affirmative and leaves no room for dispute that the offer is being accepted. In this particular instance, Belle is the one making the offer, and Alvin is the one accepting it. Acceptance can be indicated verbally, in writing, or even by one's behaviour, as was demonstrated in the case of [Brogden v. Metropolitan Railway Company]. Additionally, any restrictions about the mode of acceptance set by the offeror (belle) must be adhered to in order for the offer to be considered valid. And in this scenario, one would ask what happens in the event that the offeror is the one who does not comply with or obey a condition or provision that is written in the contract and which was accepted by the offeree. In other words, what happens in such scenario? Then there is unequivocally a violation of the agreement's terms and conditions. One could be familiar with the concept of a contract or have a general sense of what it entails, but they might not know what its components are. In addition, a contract will have a set of terms. These terms may be expressly stated, or they may be assumed to be understood. At this time, only the expressed terms have been agreed upon. They can be implied by legislation (like the Australian Consumer Law), or by the courts (like when a term is inferred on the basis of the parties' prior transactions with one another). However, expressed terms may be communicated verbally, in writing, or in a combination of the two (part written, part spoken). And in the case of Alvin, it is written audibly, and it is possible to refer to it as an expressed phrase. Clause 5, which specified that "delivery of the equipment supplied under this agreement would take place no later than 2:00 p.m. on Friday, May 10," was the explicit condition that was violated, and it is apparent that this was the case. In addition, Clause 6 has the following provision: "The Owner (Belle) warrants to the Hirer (Alvin) that the pinball machines delivered in accordance with this agreement are in excellent functioning order and in a playable condition ...... " And as stated in the lecture notes, if a term is not followed upon, then the victim in the situation is entitled to obtain a remedy for the breach of contract. In the event that Alvin violates either Clause 5 or Clause 6, he has the right to dissolve the contract. This is due to the fact that Belle did not deliver the machines on schedule, and when they were finally delivered, they were not in proper operating order. In addition to this, Alvin could be able to seek compensation for the difficulties he encountered. The late delivery of the pinball

machines by Belle constitutes a violation of the contract between the parties. Clause 5 of the contract stipulated that delivery would take place no later than 2:00 p.m. on Friday, May 10; nevertheless, Belle did not deliver the machines until 7:00 p.m. on that day. It's possible that as a result of this, Alvin lost clients and money. In addition, Belle violated the terms of the contract by delivering pinball machines that were not in excellent operational condition. Clause 6 of the agreement stipulated that the games were to be provided in a playable and fully operational state. However, after every three games, the computers needed to have their settings reset since they developed major flaws. The competition had to be called off as a result of this. It is expected that Alvin will now be allowed to cancel the contract. The contract said that all of the conditions of the contract are included herein, and that any party that was considering signing the document should first consult with appropriate and independent counsel before doing so. It would appear from this that Belle did not fully disclose all of the conditions of the contract to Alvin, which may give him the right to dissolve the agreement. In all likelihood, Alvin is also entitled to compensation for the damages. The tournament had to be cancelled due to the late delivery of the pinball machines as well as problems that were encountered with the equipment. It's possible that this caused Alvin to lose clients and money. It is likely that Alvin is eligible to get compensation for the losses that he has incurred. Now turning to the issue of breach of contract, the legal doctrine surrounding breach of contract is mostly developed from case law. This indicates that earlier judicial judgments form the basis of the law, as opposed to legislation or rules that are written down. In order for Alvin to demonstrate that a contract has been broken, it is necessary for him to demonstrate that Belle has not complied with the terms of the contract as required under the contract. For instance, he would have to demonstrate that she did not deliver the machines on time or that the machines were not in proper operating order in order to win his case. Now in this situation, a good example of this situation from a previous case law would be the "[Tramways Advertising Pty Ltd v Luna Park (1938) 38 SRNSW 632]" Case, in which a company that was supposed to be putting advertise on tram boards for 8 hours, but was actually not fulfilling those terms that they agreed to with their partner, and was actually putting it up as an advertisement for less than the 8 hours agreed upon in their clause. The court ruled that the company was in violation Therefore, in the situation involving Belle, the provisions constituted a requirement of the contract that was "so vital to its very essence that its non-performance may legitimately be seen by Alvin as a major failure to fulfil the contract at all." A violation of such a condition by one party empowers the other party not only to seek damages but also to refuse to execute any of the responsibilities that are placed on him by the agreement. Case law is also the primary source for the development of the law governing the termination of contracts. In [“Hoenig v. Isaacs] and [Bolton v. Mahadeva”], it was stated that the "innocent party shall obtain compensation for the fact that performance was not exact." This is an additional factor to consider. Because the majority of the rules governing the law of damages are also derived from previous court decisions. In order for Alvin to be awarded damages, he will need to

demonstrate that he has experienced a loss as a result of Belle's breach of contract. For instance, he could demonstrate that he had incurred financial losses as a result of the tournament being postponed. The law of contract is a body of legislation that controls the creation, execution, and enforcement of contracts. The laws governing each of these concerns are derived from the law of contract, therefore they are all built on the same foundation. The law of contracts is also relevant to the question of whether Alvin can recover damages for the problems he experienced and to the question of whether Alvin can terminate the contract that he had signed. Both of these questions are related to whether or not Alvin can get out of the agreement that he had signed. BIBLIOGRAPHY

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

- Contract Law Casenote: Tramways Advertising Pty Ltd v Luna Park (NSW) Ltd 1938. (n.d.). Retrieved from netk.net.au website: http://netk.net.au/Contract/Tramways.asp - Brogden v Metropolitan Rly Co. (2019). Retrieved from Lawteacher.net website: https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/brogden-v-metropolitan.php - Wikipedia Contributors. (2019, September 23). Brogden v Metropolitan Rly Co. Retrieved November 26, 2019, from Wikipedia website: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brogden_v_Metropolitan_Rly_Co - Express terms. (n.d.). Retrieved from Australian Contract Law website: https://www.australiancontractlaw.info/law/terms#:~:text=These %20terms%20may%20broadly%20be - Clarke, J. (2021). Australian Contract Law. Retrieved from Australian Contract Law website: https://www.australiancontractlaw.info/ - Commission, A.C. and C. (2012). Entering into a contract . [online] Australian Competition and Consumer Commission. Available at: https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/buying-products-and-services/enteri ng-into-a-contract [Accessed 6 Oct. 2022]. - Sullivan, M. E. (n.d.). Breach of contract. Retrieved from www.lawhandbook.sa.gov.au website: https://lawhandbook.sa.gov.au/ch10s03s07.php - Remedies for Breach of Contract. (n.d.). Retrieved from www.lawhandbook.sa.gov.au website: https://lawhandbook.sa.gov.au/ch10s03s08.php - Bolton v Mahadeva. (2022, May 18). Retrieved October 6, 2022, from Wikipedia website: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolton_v_Mahadeva - Hoenig v Isaacs - 1952. (n.d.). Retrieved from www.lawteacher.net website: https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/hoenig-v-isaacs.php

LAW OF COMMERCE ASSIGNMENT

Related Documents