Generally, when discuss a question about contract it should take 5 issues into account: Firstly, are the plaintiff and defendant in a contractual relationship? Secondly, can the plaintiff get damages for breach of contract? Thirdly, can the plaintiff “get out” of the contract? Fourthly, can the plaintiff end the contract? Finally, are there any alternative remedies available to the plaintiff? In this question, it will be examined one by one.
As it notes that a contract is an agreement (or set of promises) between two or more parties involving the creation of legal rights and obligations which will be enforced by the courts. It must be mutual agreement and a valid contract will be enforceable in a court of law. But how the parties can be seen …show more content…
It means when one party makes an offer; the other party must accept that offer and then get an agreement. In the occasion that the offeree makes a counter-offer, the agreement can not be settled. Second, intention to contract in other words is the intention to create legal relations between the parties. The courts classifies agreement into social, domestic, business, and commercial, parties only in business and commercial agreement do intend to create legal relations. Third, consideration is describes as something of value with the purpose to exchange a promise-in a contract is the obligation for each party. For example, Part A asked Part B to pay an amount of $5000 for buying a used car. When Part B agreed to pay $5000, and indeed paid it. This $5000 is a consideration which is the value exchange for the used car. In this case, the contract is enforceable. But this requirement of consideration is not always necessary, when the contract is made under seal. Moreover the consideration must have some value and equitable to the promise. Because according to Chappll Co Ltd v Nestle Co Ltd (1966) AC 87 an inadequacy of consideration may suggest unfair dealing. This may render the contract void or voidable. Fourthly, legal capacity, it is said that “Breach of contract” means that on of the parties to the contract has not carried out their obligations or duties under contract. For example, if a leasee can not pay the rent …show more content…
When one party breaches a contract, the other party may ask a court to provide a remedy for breach. This remedy is called damages (Austlii, 2012).There are three types of damages-ordinary damages, nominal damages and exemplary damages. Ordinary damages are the most common form of damages and suffered by plaintiff because of the default of defendant and will award by the court. Nominal damages are plaintiff’s legal rights have been infringed but without actual loss. Exemplary damages will be awarded to punish the party in default. Amount of damages how much plaintiff will recover is according to the rule of qualify the losses. If the loss cannot be accurately quantified a court will engaged a “guesswork” in order to make an order for damages (e.g. Howe v Teefy (1927) 27 SR (NSW)301). Generally, A plaintiff can sue for either liquidated or unliquidated damages or both of them because of breach of contract, whereas liquidated refers to an amount specified in the contract, while unliquidated is not. The general rule for plaintiff get remedies for the loss for breach of contract are not covered any disappointment, distress, injured feelings or mere inconvenience arising from the breach (e.g. Jarvis v Swan Tours (1972) 3 WLR 954). (P 280)
There are three types of misrepresentation: fraudulent misrepresentation, innocent misrepresentation and negligent misrepresentation. Firstly,
As it notes that a contract is an agreement (or set of promises) between two or more parties involving the creation of legal rights and obligations which will be enforced by the courts. It must be mutual agreement and a valid contract will be enforceable in a court of law. But how the parties can be seen …show more content…
It means when one party makes an offer; the other party must accept that offer and then get an agreement. In the occasion that the offeree makes a counter-offer, the agreement can not be settled. Second, intention to contract in other words is the intention to create legal relations between the parties. The courts classifies agreement into social, domestic, business, and commercial, parties only in business and commercial agreement do intend to create legal relations. Third, consideration is describes as something of value with the purpose to exchange a promise-in a contract is the obligation for each party. For example, Part A asked Part B to pay an amount of $5000 for buying a used car. When Part B agreed to pay $5000, and indeed paid it. This $5000 is a consideration which is the value exchange for the used car. In this case, the contract is enforceable. But this requirement of consideration is not always necessary, when the contract is made under seal. Moreover the consideration must have some value and equitable to the promise. Because according to Chappll Co Ltd v Nestle Co Ltd (1966) AC 87 an inadequacy of consideration may suggest unfair dealing. This may render the contract void or voidable. Fourthly, legal capacity, it is said that “Breach of contract” means that on of the parties to the contract has not carried out their obligations or duties under contract. For example, if a leasee can not pay the rent …show more content…
When one party breaches a contract, the other party may ask a court to provide a remedy for breach. This remedy is called damages (Austlii, 2012).There are three types of damages-ordinary damages, nominal damages and exemplary damages. Ordinary damages are the most common form of damages and suffered by plaintiff because of the default of defendant and will award by the court. Nominal damages are plaintiff’s legal rights have been infringed but without actual loss. Exemplary damages will be awarded to punish the party in default. Amount of damages how much plaintiff will recover is according to the rule of qualify the losses. If the loss cannot be accurately quantified a court will engaged a “guesswork” in order to make an order for damages (e.g. Howe v Teefy (1927) 27 SR (NSW)301). Generally, A plaintiff can sue for either liquidated or unliquidated damages or both of them because of breach of contract, whereas liquidated refers to an amount specified in the contract, while unliquidated is not. The general rule for plaintiff get remedies for the loss for breach of contract are not covered any disappointment, distress, injured feelings or mere inconvenience arising from the breach (e.g. Jarvis v Swan Tours (1972) 3 WLR 954). (P 280)
There are three types of misrepresentation: fraudulent misrepresentation, innocent misrepresentation and negligent misrepresentation. Firstly,