Business Law
The case is a promissory estoppel situation where Dhafir acted upon Hansen’s legal action if any damages occur from the falling tree. Hansen can place a claim stating the cutting of the diseased limb and not the whole tree as a premise. The courts will still proceed with the promissory that Hansen made as it is the ignitor of Dhafir’s decision to cut the tree.
Legal Capacity to Contract and Requirement of Legality
The issue is the involvement of a minor in a contract before they attain the legal age of participating in one. The car sellers will hold John responsible for the debts as he is in the legal age to handle contractual issues. Linda can only participate in settling the debts at her discretion. The law will only bind John to the agreements as he is an adult.
The Requirements of Form, Writing and Privacy
The case reflects an instance where a company executive provides a personal guarantee to the organization’s debts. Simple then gave up his limited liability to the organization and has to take the responsibility of the loans when the company defaults. Therefore, the bank has justification to collect the debts from Simple due to the agreement he signed (Laurence, 2016).
Failure to Create an Enforceable Contract
The issue in the case is that the property owner signs a contract ignorantly and transfers the ownership of the house to another person. The owner of the asset can develop their argument on the front of a misrepresentation to void the agreement. However, the owner has to prove that they could not have continued with the transaction if they had the information (Izzy, 2015).
The Extent of Contractual Rights
The problem derives from a unilateral mistake in which only one party among the three is aware of the assignment of contracts. Both Avi and Malcolm are not aware of a majority of the case details. However, Avi cannot bear the risk of the transfer unless it is his discretion. Avi and Malcolm can void the agreements on the grounds of unawareness and call Carlos back to it.
Performance of Contractual Obligation
The case involves the abandonment and interference of a contract by a third party. Mr. McPhail can launch an argument that the contractor abandoned a part of the job, and he gets payment for the section he completed. Hamish should take the payment for the part of the work he did as the interference could not cause any form of damages on his part.
Breach of Contract and Remedies
The case involves an instance of quantum merit. Both parties did not stipulate the conditions and prices of the work. Therefore, Trebic will argue that it was the mistake of his client, and he deserves the work as he has already rendered the service. The court should award Trebic the full amount as he has completed the work as are the requirements of the design.
Breach of Contract and Remedies
The case focuses on the damages the company incurs from the actor’s express repudiation. The company can argue that the violation was unforeseeable and led to the loss of the funds they paid in other production contracts as part of the filming process. Therefore, Valentino should settle the full costs of the damages as they are a result of his repudiation.
Law of Sole Proprietorship and Partnership
The case presents a contradictory issue between an act of agency and partnership. Fiona made a delivery contract with Harold, and that is the person that should handle her damages as Herbert shall serve as an agent of the deal. However, if Fiona proves that she held the two as partners, then the courts can hold both parties responsible for the damage of the chair.
Law of Sole Proprietorship and Partnership
The case covers confusion between a partnership and borrowing. Sarah is a minor that cannot participate in a contract. Sarah can use that to void the agreement between them in court. Therefore, the court focuses on the intention of the two parties at the time of contract. As no intention is clear, the court depends on the decision of Sarah to share the proceeds or not.
References
Izzy, M. Innocent Misrepresentation Laws. Legal Match. Retrieved on 4th April 2016 from: http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/innocent-misrepresentation.html
Laurence, B. Are You Personally Liable for your Business’ Debts? Nolo. Retrieved on 4th April 2016 from: http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/business-debts-personal-liability-29905.html
