The Position Under English Law Essay

Mr. Potbelly holds a garage sale at his home. Mr. Slim Jim stops by the sale and upon noticing a rare piece of art pottery offers a price of $100 for the art that is marked $250. Mr. Potbelly accepts Mr. Slim Jim’s offer. Mr. Potbelly informs Mr. Slim Jim he is selling his home because he is moving up north because he has lost his job. Mr. Slim Jim asks how much he is selling it for and Mr. Potbelly informs him he is thinking $75,000. Mr. Slim Jim offers him $70,000 cash for the property which Mr. Potbelly immediately accepts the offer. Mr. Slim Jim informs Mr. Potbelly that he will be back in one hour with a cashiers’ check made payable to Mr. Potbelly. Mr. Potbelly says “Great!” and that while Mr. Slim Jim

1) Since the injured plaintiff was not wearing a seatbelt, why is Ford being sued for failing to test the seatbelt sleeve?

As Privy Council held in the case of "Wagon Mound (No 1)" that a party can only be held liable for damage that was reasonably foreseeable, the defendant should not be responsible for losses that are ‘too remote’ from the breach. It is obviously that the university could foresee that Brad have to quit his job to finish the degree and also need to pay for the fees.

There are four primary sources of American law that “establish rights, duties, and privileges that are consistent with the values and beliefs of a society or its ruling group” (Miller, 2014). One of the oldest sources of primary law is the U.S. Constitution, which was ratified by delegates from 12 states on September 17, 1787 (The Constitution of the United States, 2015). The document has stood the test of time and been a model for many other nations with its emphasis on a strong government with maximum human freedom while avoiding tyranny (The Constitution of the United States, 2015). Since each state also has its own constitution, this would be in the same category as a primary source of American law. The second primary source of

This letter is to advise you that your tax appeal hearing is coming up on March 6, 2005 at 10:35 a.m. at the Office of the Tax Assessors of Lackawanna County. The office is located on the 5th floor of the County Office Building; 211 Ace Road, Clark, Pennsylvania 18111. Attorney Smith would like to remind you to arrive at the County Office Building at 10:25 a.m. with all of the pictures you have of the comparable houses in your area.

In this paper I am going to identify some the legal and ethical issues in My Sister’s Keeper. Some of those issues include emancipation of a minor, genetic engineering, and limited termination of parental rights. I will be giving my opinion on these matters also.

15–1. Liquidated Damages. Carnack contracts to sell his house and lot to Willard for $100,000. The terms of the contract call for Willard to make a deposit of 10 percent of the purchase price as a down payment. The terms further stipulate that if the buyer breaches the contract, Carnack will retain the deposit as liquidated damages. Willard makes the deposit, but because her expected financing of the $90,000 balance falls through, she breaches the contract. Two weeks later, Carnack sells the house and lot to Balkova for $105,000. Willard demands her $10,000 back, but Carnack refuses, claiming that Willard’s breach and the contract terms entitle him to keep the deposit. Discuss who is correct. (See Damages.)

This story is replete with fascinating facts and the intricacies that are inherent in the facts of the case make for a great story.The baseball bat was broken from the outset when it was bought by the plaintiff. Therefore, the defendant should have to return the baseball bat and pay the money back to the plaintiff that plaintiff paid for said bat. The plaintiff bought a baseball bat from the defendant and the baseball bat turned out to be broken because, since as soon as the defendant used the bat to play baseball, the bat shattered into a million pieces. Shattering into a million pieces certainly violates the implied warranty of merchantability under the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC 2-314). No Industria De Calcados Martini Ltda. v.

Merit –compare and contrast the role of judges ,lawyers and lay people within the English courts.

Your managing partner has handed you the Supreme Court of Queenslands’ decision in The Public Trustee of Queensland and Anor v Meyer and Ors [2010] QSC 291 and asked you to answer the following questions. You should assume you are answering questions for someone who has not read the case, so be sure to provide sufficient detail in your answers. You do not need to provide reference details for Part A of the assignment.

1.Adams orders one thousand widgets at $5 per widget from International Widget to be delivered within sixty days. After the contract is consummated and signed, Adams requests that International deliver the widgets within thirty days rather than sixty days. International agrees. Is the contractual modification binding?

To begin, the Arrowhead School District v. James A. Klyap case teaches us about liquidated damages. Liquidated damages are damages for breach by either party that may be liquidated in the agreement but only at an amount which is reasonable in the light of the anticipated or actual harm caused by the breach, the difficulties of proof of loss, and the inconvenience or nonfeasibility of otherwise obtaining an adequate remedy. James Klyap was hired as a new teacher in the Arrowhead school district where he signed a contract

Judicial precedent refers to the sources of law where past decisions made by judges create law for future judges to follow. An example would be the Donoghue vs Stevenson case, where Stevenson had bought ginger beer, and Donoghue had drank it after their been a decomposed snail in it, however their was no charge because she was not in a contract with

1. The issue is whether public school officials have the authority to perform strip searches of students in suspicion of hiding illegal drugs.

The disclaimer that protects Sierra Nevada Trees Inc. from liability in a claim for consequential damages contained in the purchase order acknowledgement is part of the agreement with Burger Ranch Inc. Burger Ranch Inc. accepted the terms of the offer and there was proper performance by both parties.