- Question 1
Issue
The major issue presented in this question is whether the statement agreed between Peter and Forever Furniture is a term as defined under the law of contract. The statement in question was made when Peter and Forever Furniture agreed to sell an office chair that will support my back sufficiently to allow me to spend the whole day working in the study comfortably without developing back pain and a leather to synthetic materials on the chair.
The critical issue presented amid this request is regardless of whether the declaration agreed among Peter and Forever article of furniture could be a term as described underneath the law of assention. The partner degreenouncement being commented was made once Peter and Forever article of furniture agreed to supply a work environment situate which will reinforce my back enough to change Maine to pay the entire day working inside the examination calmly while not making back desolation and a calf to made materials on the seat.
Rule
The main rule is that a statement that has been made before a contract was entered into is a mere presentation because it has not been made in written form expressly in the agreement. The court in Duffy v Newcastle United Football Co. Ltd.[1] Insisted that the a term of a contract must be expressed in written form. However, Birch v Paramount Estates Ltd[2] reached a divergent position by pronouncing …show more content…
It is true that that the intention of the parties form the agreements and that the OFFICE PRO 9X would provide sufficient back support for peter to work all day and because peter had a prior request that the chair be made of leather compared to synthetic. The parties would not have made an agreement if there was no consensus ad idem regarding the back support and the
Issue
The major issue presented in this question is whether the statement agreed between Peter and Forever Furniture is a term as defined under the law of contract. The statement in question was made when Peter and Forever Furniture agreed to sell an office chair that will support my back sufficiently to allow me to spend the whole day working in the study comfortably without developing back pain and a leather to synthetic materials on the chair.
The critical issue presented amid this request is regardless of whether the declaration agreed among Peter and Forever article of furniture could be a term as described underneath the law of assention. The partner degreenouncement being commented was made once Peter and Forever article of furniture agreed to supply a work environment situate which will reinforce my back enough to change Maine to pay the entire day working inside the examination calmly while not making back desolation and a calf to made materials on the seat.
Rule
The main rule is that a statement that has been made before a contract was entered into is a mere presentation because it has not been made in written form expressly in the agreement. The court in Duffy v Newcastle United Football Co. Ltd.[1] Insisted that the a term of a contract must be expressed in written form. However, Birch v Paramount Estates Ltd[2] reached a divergent position by pronouncing …show more content…
It is true that that the intention of the parties form the agreements and that the OFFICE PRO 9X would provide sufficient back support for peter to work all day and because peter had a prior request that the chair be made of leather compared to synthetic. The parties would not have made an agreement if there was no consensus ad idem regarding the back support and the