393.EXAM.MDTMANSW.FALL2010 - COMMERCE/BUSI 393 MIDTERM...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
COMMERCE/BUSI 393 MIDTERM ANSWER GUIDE OCTOBER 2010 QUESTION #1 a) Is the fact that Courtenay underage a defence for Hannah? In BC an infant is anyone under 19. The Infants Act says that contract with infants are unenforceable against the infant, but enforceable against the adult. Courtenay can enforce the contract against Hannah even though she is an infant. Agreements must have consideration to be enforceable contracts. Consideration is what a party gives up or agrees to give up in exchange for the promise of the other party. Hannah agreed to give Courtenay a share in her business; Courtenay did not promise anything in return. Courtenay’s claim will not be successful because Hannah’s promise was not binding. b) The doctrine of promissory estoppel says that when a party creates an impression that it will not enforce strict legal rights, and the other party acts on that impression to its detriment, it cannot take the other party by surprise. It can be used only as a defence. (It does not normally make promises without consideration binding). Courtenay is trying to found her claim on estoppels, so she could not use it here. QUESTION #2
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 05/31/2011 for the course COMM 393 taught by Professor Elaine during the Fall '10 term at The University of British Columbia.

Page1 / 3

393.EXAM.MDTMANSW.FALL2010 - COMMERCE/BUSI 393 MIDTERM...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online