This is a typical case of who bears the responsibility for the loss of merchandise. Is it Thompson Corp. or is it, Murah Corp. Well, Thompson Corp. placed an order of 1000 outdoor aluminum table by fax to Murah Corp. for $250 per set. And Murah Corp. replied to Thompson Corp. order by sending them a thank you email and assuring them that they will deliver the goods within 30 days; plus, in the meantime they want Thompson Corp. to send them a 10% down payment check and a copy of an agreement where it said, “in the events if disputes, parties must arbitrate in Chicago” please sign and send it on the 10th days. Thompson Corp. sends a note to Murah Corp. with the down payment of $25,000 and an agreement and their agreement said: “in the events of any disputes, all…show more content… After twenty-five days, later Murah Corp. inform Thompson Corp. by fax that the goods are being shipped through CD Truck Co. to its warehouses requested and they are mailing Bill of Lading. However, on the thirtieth day, Murah Corp. inform Thompson Corp. by fax that all the goods are being lost in an accident and they are demanding the balance of the payment. Thompson Corp. faxed back and demanded the return of their down payment. But, Murah Corp. is asking for arbitration.
The first thing we should look for is there a contract exists between both parties and throughout their communication by fax and email we learned that yes there is a contract. Even though, both parties never signed the contract that they send it to each other, but neither they send any kind of objection to each other regarding the contract or its term. Now the question is what are the Thompson Corp. rights? Well, the Thompson Corp. does have a right to receive remedies for the loss of his 1000 aluminum table and chair sets. But Thompson Corp. cannot receive that remedy from Murah Corp. Because when Thompson Corp. placed an order they did not specify in their contract who bears the responsibility for