Legal Obligations And Remedies In Contract Breaches
The validity of contracts and partnership agreements
In this case, a person named as Lance, purchase the vehicle from Pty Ltd for $25000. Lance is the partner in the herbal product business, and three partners had an agreement that the vehicle would be purchased for the business and not spend exceeding $ 20000 for the vehicle. The issue is whether the partnership will bound by this contract and the other person can take legal action against the Lance.
The agreement refers as a private contract between the parties which consist of the mutual obligation and can be enforced by the law (Smith, 2018). There are several types of agreement such as express agreement, implied agreement and so on. The express agreement, which may be oral or written form and certainly defines the right and the obligation of the parties. In the partnership firm, it is essential that all partners have to fulfil the terms and conditions which are specified in the agreement. Any partner who is breaking the agreement will be personally liable for any liability (Bordia, Bordia, and Restubog, 2015). The activities of the partnership are carried by all the partners or by any one partner who is authorised by other partners of the firm. Along with this, if the agreement is not valid, then it cannot be enforceable by the law, and for the validity of the contract, there must be the presence of the agreement, acceptance, consideration, capacity and the mutual obligation (O’Sullivan, and Hilliard, 2016).
In this study, there is an agreement between the Lance the Mighty Motors Pty Ltd vehicle company. The company agreed to sell the car to Lance at $25000, and the Lance gave acceptance to this. Since both the parties competent to contract along with they know about their right and obligation for the contract. Therefore there is a valid contract between the lance and Motor Vehicle Company.
However, there is an agreement between the three partners that purchase price of the vehicle not more than $20000, since Lance break the agreement by buying the vehicle at a more price which was agreed upon by the partner. Since agreement between the parties is also the valid contract as there is agreement, acceptance, capacity, consideration and mutual obligation exist.
Conclusion
On the basis of the above study, it has been concluded that since there is valid contract exist between the Lance and the Mighty Motors Pty Ltd. Therefore it is the obligation of the Lance to make the payment to the vehicle company. Since the Lance was the partner of the partnership firm, but he breaks the agreement which was entered by the firm. Therefore there is no obligation of the partnership firm for this contract. Further, all the other partners of the firm can also order to lance for the payment of all the damages by which they suffered due to the breach of the contract.
Consumer law and false advertising
In this study, it was stated that the business produced moisturiser and promoted the product like that, the use of this product ensures the reduction of the effect of ageing, however actually it was not true. The issue is whether the consumers have a remedy with respect to claims from the company.
Further, another issue in this study is that the company entered into the contract to sell the car to the person named as Saqlaim, who has little knowledge about the English. However the partner of the company named as a lance, though the fast-talking English talks him into the purchasing car and further he entered into the contract with the finance company to purchase the car. The issue is whether the Saqlaim will be bound by the contract.
Consumer law of Australia describes the various standards, rules and regulation for the manufacture of the product and also the rights of the consumer (Australian Consumer Law, 2018). Organizations are not permissible to make a false representation, promotion and advertisement of their product. It is the right of the consumer to get the true and correct information about the product (Hensler, 2018).
The contract must not be signed by the person until the person gets understand proper terms and conditions of the contract. If the person put the sign on the contract, then he/she become legally binding on the contract (Making a Contract, 2018). Each party of the contract is legally binding for the performance of their obligation and any person who fails to perform their obligation then it will lead to the breach of the contract.
Moreover, if the contract was for the benefit of the third party, then the strict application of the law may lead to typical outcomes. For addressing this, the law provides some remedies to the person; this is referred to as a doctrine of privity contract (Pearson, 2018). However, this contract will be applicable only if, due to the contract non-contractual rights and obligation arises, then it is possible to implement against or in favour of those parties who are not the contractual parties.
In the present case the company advertising the product by stating that the moisturiser will reduce the impact of the ageing, however, it was wrong. According to the provision of the consumer law of Australia, the business is not allowed to make the false representation, promotion and the advertisement of their product. Moreover the consumers also right to sue the company for the misleading advertisement (Micklitz, and Saumier, 2018).
Privity contract and contractual rights and obligations
Moreover, in the present study, although the Saqlaim was not able to understand proper English, also he entered into the contract with the Lance for buying the vehicle. Along with this, he enters into the contract with the financial institution to purchase the vehicle. Here, the doctrine of privity contract will be applicable, as it applies to the contractual rights and duties.
Conclusion
On the basis of the above analyses, it has been concluded that consumers can sue the company for the false advertisement of the product and can file the application in the court against the company (Goldberger, 2016).
Along with this, by the application of the doctrine of privity contract, saqlaim can get the remedy.
In the present study, Flexi is employed as a worker by the Xiaojing and paid $ 25 cash per bag. However one day Xiaojing made the promise to Flexi for the payment of an extra $ 100 as the Xiaojing was impressed by the good work of flex done on the yesterday. But Xiaojing breaks the contract and Flexi got angry. The issue is whether the Flexi can sue the Xiaojing for the $100.
The contract is referred to as a legal binding agreement between the two parties. There are five elements for making the contract enforceable by law, which is agreement, consideration, capability, objective, and certainty (Burrows, 2018). With this regards, the agreement is consist of in which one party gave the offer to another party, and other party gave their acceptance on offer, it is the first and essential requirement of the contract (Smith, and Duke, 2014). There must be consideration given by the person; it may be monetary or non-monetary. Both the person has the capacity to enter into the contract; the primary condition is that they should be of sound mind. Further, there should be a mutual agreement between the parties for the performance of the right and obligation. Along with this, the contract must be clear, certain, complete and binding. If all the above conditions are satisfied, then the only contract will be enforceable by the law (Goldberger, 2018).
In the present case, Xiaojing made the offer to Flexi for the employment. Flexi gave their acceptance and started worked for Xiaojing. Xiaojing agreed to pay the Flexi $ 25 cash per bag. Since all the five essential conditions of the contract are satisfied under this situation. As there is an agreement between the Xiaojing and Flexi and the consideration is also paid by the Xiaojing. Both the parties are capable of contracting. Therefore the contract is enforceable by the law.
However, in this study, it is further given that due to the good performance of the Flexi, Xiajing will give extra $100 to Flexi for the work done by him on the yesterday. In such situation there is no agreement between the Xiajing and Flexi related to any work, Flexi was normally performed work on the yesterday. The promise of the extra consideration provided by the Xiaojing is as per her own wish. Therefore there is not any binding agreement and contract exists for the extra consideration to Flexi.
Conclusion
On the basis of the above study, it has been concluded that since there is no condition with respect to the extra consideration provided to Flexi is present in the existing contract. Xiaojing tells for the extra benefit of $100 as voluntary; there is no legal binding agreement. Therefore Flexi is not eligible to sue Xiaojing for the $100.
References
Australian Consumer Law. 2018. Consumers and the ACL. [Online]. Available through <https://consumerlaw.gov.au/consumers-and-the-acl/>. [Accessed on 29th October 2018].
Bordia, S., Bordia, P. and Restubog, S.L.D., 2015. Promises from afar: a model of international student psychological contract in business education. Studies in Higher Education, 40(2), pp.212-232.
Burrows, A.S., 2018. Contract, Tort and Restitution—A Satisfactory Division or Not?. In Restitution (pp. 3-53). Routledge.
Goldberger, J., 2016. The restitutionary remedy in Australian law. Commercial Law Quarterly: The Journal of the Commercial Law Association of Australia, 30(3), p.14.
Goldberger, J., 2018. Contract law in the cases: 2017 in review. Commercial Law Quarterly: The Journal of the Commercial Law Association of Australia, 32(1), p.32.
Hensler, D.R., 2018. 17. Using class actions to enforce consumer protection law. Handbook of research on international consumer law, 1(1) p.445.
Making a Contract, 2018. [Online]. Available through <https://lawhandbook.sa.gov.au/ch10s02s01.php>. [Accessed on 29th October 2018].
Micklitz, H.W. and Saumier, G., 2018. Enforcement and Effectiveness of Consumer Law. In Enforcement and Effectiveness of Consumer Law (pp. 3-45). Springer, Cham.
O’Sullivan, J. and Hilliard, J., 2016. The law of contract. Oxford University Press.
Pearson, G., 2018. Enforcement and Effectiveness of Consumer Law in Australia. In Enforcement and Effectiveness of Consumer Law (pp. 75-97). Springer, Cham.
Smith, J., 2018. Contract law in Australia [Book Review]. Ethos: Official Publication of the Law Society of the Australian Capital Territory, (248), p.60.
Smith, R.L. and Duke, A., 2014. Agreements and competition law in Australia. Competition and Consumer Law Journal, 22, pp.54-79.