Bruce V 's Home And Garden 's Ltd

1671 Words7 Pages
Bruce V Matilda’s Home and Garden’s Ltd How/if the terms that Matilda’s solicitor refers to affect Bruce’s potential claims against her. Affect bruce when he make a claim?(OBVIOUSLY) but then HOW? In the fact scenario given, Bruce has entered into a contract with a local contractor to expand the café premises into his garden to keep up with demand. When the the work was done, Bruce saw that almost none of his plants had been planted as agreed upon. His rosemary and sage plants looked trampled and juniper bush had replaced his beloved maple sapling. When he woke up the next day his hands were itchy and sore and felt unwell and when he went to the garden he noticed his mature roses seemed to be dying. Bruce sought to claim damages for a…show more content…
However, by reading the terms and conditions of the contract and signing the contract B agrees on entering into a legally binding agreement. Finally, for the consideration part of the contract at the bottom of the page of the quote was a tear-off slip with instructions for B to sign and to return the slip with a deposit. B sent the tear-off slip with a cheque for the deposit. Since all the elements of the contract were formed the contract is considered valid. Consequently, where there is a written contract which is signed, a party is bound by all the terms in the contract irrespective of whether they were aware of the terms it contained. For instance, in case of L 'Estrange v Graucob 1934 the plaintiff bought a cigarette vending machine to use it in her cafe. She claimed under Sales Goods Act that the machine do not work. But later got to know that the order form she signed had in small print the terms and conditions that expressly excluded any condition, warranty, statutory, and express and implied term. Therefore, the court by acknowledging the fact that she had signed the waiver clause held the decision that she was bound by all the terms whether or not she had read them and that her claim is unsuccessful. (L 'Estrange v Graucob [1934] C (CA)) Similarly, B may not have a claim because he had signed the waiver clause in the contract. B by waiving a breach of contact by M, it may voluntarily

More about Bruce V 's Home And Garden 's Ltd

Open Document