S050 praj

.docx

School

Douglas College *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

MISC

Subject

Law

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

5

Uploaded by EarlStrawCaterpillar18

CASE 10 Tom Tarl obtains a contract with the Burquitlam Shopping Centre on April 7, to pave the parking lot by May 15 for $45 000. Tarl then enters into a written contract with Frank Fether on April 9 to pave Fether’s driveway by May 20 for $3 000. On April 21, Tarl’s employee Hank becomes ill. Without Hank’s help, Tarl feels that he will not be able to complete both the Burquitlam contract and the Fether contract on time. Tarl calls Fether to tell him that the contract is off. Fether agrees. The next morning, Hank makes a remarkable recovery from his illness, and he is back at work by that afternoon. Tarl realizes that he can now finish both contracts on time. He calls Fether to affirm that he will be able to pave his driveway after all. Fether tells Tarl that his services are no longer required. Tarl reminds Fether of the written agreement, and insists that he honour the agreement. Fether refuses. CASE 11 Gretchen entered into a contract with Matt. He paid her $2500, and she promised to edit a book that Matt was writing. After completing slightly more than half of the job, Gretchen received an offer to act in a play on Broadway. Since acting had always been her dream, she pleaded with Matt to let her go to New York without finishing her editing. She also asked if she could keep the $2500 that she received from him, because she needed a lot of money to move. Since Matt was fond of Gretchen, he agreed. She then sold all her things, including the computer she used for her editing, and moved to New York. A week later, when Matt learned that Gretchen was acting in Cats , a Broadway play that he disliked very much, he changed his mind, and now insists that Gretchin must fulfill the rest of her contractual obligations. Gretchen refuses to do so. CASE 12 Emma entered into an oral contract with her uncle Aiden, in which Emma promised to take care of him for the rest of his life and Aiden promised to leave his house to her under his will. That house was worth $300 000. Emma performed her end of the bargain by spending $5000 to care of her uncle before he died. Upon his death, she was disappointed to learn that his will did not leave the house to her. Emma thought about suing her uncle’s estate for breach of contract. However, her lawyer explained that such an action will fail because while the contract is valid, it is also unenforceable. What claim, if any, does Emma have against her uncle’s estate?
_ /10 CASE 10 _ /1 Parties - Tarl vs Fether _ /2 Issue - Is the contract enforceable by Tarl even though he displayed frustration _ /2 Law - Associations- Only legal persons can have capacity: human beings and corporations - Absence of writing- Normally contracts are not required to be written Contracts not to be performed within one year: Statue is in force except in BC or Manitoba. Writing requirements: Contract’s essential elements (parties, subject matter , price ) several documents may be pieced together. - Effect on Non-compliance is unenforceable but not void, sufficient to transfer property . neither party can take action in court _ /3 Analysis - As they both are human being the have capacity to get into contract. As the Statue states that Contracts which are not to be performed within one year do not need a written agreement except for BC and Manitoba, since the contract is taking place in BC the statue is not force. The written has all the requirement which is the subject matter which to pave Fether’s drive for $3000 and specific dates, it is a valid written agreement. - Fether will agrue that we agreed on rescinding the agreement as Tarl showed Frustation by the inability to work by his worker, but since that was not written and not pieced together with the original agreement, it will not be considered. _ /2 Remedy - Even though there was Non-compliance by Fether, it is not enforcebale and no action can be taken in court but it is a valid contract. -
_/10 CASE 11 _ /1 Parties - Matt vs Gretchen _ /2 Issue - Did Matt waive off his rights or was there Breach of Contract under intermediate term _ /2 Law - Waiver- abandonment of right to performance Enforceable without consideration or seal No particular form required Required clear intent to waive rights Retraction possible upon notice ( unless fair) - Breach of Contract, type of breach to be determined as the type of term in Intermediate: hybrid term Intermediate Term: Uncertain Importance Significance of Breach is Unclear Consider - What portion of total performance is defective? - How Serious is the breach? - How likely is the breach to recur? Treated as Condition is benefit is in fact substantially lost Treated as Warranty is benefit is in fact NOT substantially lost _ /3 Analysis - Gretchen would argue that Matt waived off the right to perform as he agreed to her going to New York and not completing the editing and he also agreed to let her keep the $2500, this shows the intent to waive of the right and even though retraction is possible under waiver, no notice was provided by Matt. - Matt argues that there was Breach of contract as the contractual promise was not fulfilled, he is likely to consider the question to determine the significance of breach as it is not clear to classify it as either a Condition or Warranty. As she completed more than half of the total performance the benefit lost is not that substantial. The breach is very serious as the non-completion of book can lead to loss of possible sales of the publish book. The breach is not likely to recur as the opportunity present to Gretchen to become asn actor was a one-time thing and not something that will happen again. As 2 of the 3 questions lead to the term being relatively less important, it will be considered a Warranty term.
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