Contract & Agency Law

3381 WordsNov 9, 200914 Pages
Payment, similar to consideration, is one of the four elements of a contract. Consideration is something of value in a contract or agreement between two parties. Both parties must be providing something of value to the other party. It is an act or promise to do (or not to do) something in return for value and the value given is enforceable. All the law need is ‘valuable consideration '. For example, if Jack has offered to pay S$10 for a hammer worth S$100, that is considered valuable consideration. There are three types of consideration in law: executory consideration, executed consideration and past consideration. In this case study, the agreement of payment between Food Enterprises Ltd and Nerd Private Ltd, clause 2.2 indicates that…show more content…
Confidential information is not property, but you can control access to it, and license its use or transfer it to another person. In Singapore, most employees will need to acknowledge the staff or employees handbook or code of conduct upon joining the company. Some companies require its employees to acknowledge it on an annual or bi-yearly basis. In one of these clauses, indicates that information of the company is to be treated with utmost confidentiality. However, as much as either party tries to keep all information confidential, there tend to be obligations of confidence. This exists when this is an express obligation due to the relationship they share. Thus, the law implies that one party must know of the confidentiality of the information. Obligations of confidence are present in the following relationships: fiduciary relationships, company officers and employees, and employment. In clause 6.1 of the Services Terms and Condition, any confidential information is available for use only in connection with the agreement. It may also be reproduced or reasonably copied for the performance of obligations by the receiver. In the case of Vandashima (Singapore) Pte Ltd and Another vs Tiong Sing Lean and Another (2006) SGHC 132, the first defendant, Tiong, employed by the first plaintiff, Vandashima (Singapore) Pte Ltd, was holding a high post in the company. He misused his authority and power to trade

More about Contract & Agency Law

Open Document