week 4( 6 slices per page

week 4( 6 slices per page - ASSIGNMENT 1 BUSINESS AND THE...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
1 BUSINESS AND THE LAW CONTRACTS (Cont’d): Week 4 Terms and Vitiating Elements LEGT 1710: Session 2, 2010 Lecturer: Leela Cejnar 2 ASSIGNMENT 1 DUE NEXT WEEK: Week 5 (Week commencing 16 August, 2010) Hand to your tutor in your own tutorial Use Assignment Cover Sheet See back of Course Outline 3 ASSIGNMENT 2 • Will available on Blackboard from Monday 16 August • Due at beginning of Week 9 of session 2 – Monday 20 September, by 5pm 4 Requirements for a valid contract • Intention to enter into a legally binding contract • Offer and Acceptance • Consideration or price • Legal capacity • Genuine consent • Legality of purpose • Any formal/procedural requirements must be satisfied 5 Week 3: Summary Essential elements of contract 1. The Offer – Must be • Intention/meeting of minds ( Clarke v Earl of Dunraven ) • Firm promise • Communication – Notice of Offer (Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball) – Invitation to treat (Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots) – Counter-Offers 6 Week 3: Summary 2. The Acceptance • Must be in response to Offer (R v Clarke) • Absolute, unqualified • Any conditions must be fulfilled • Clear and certain • Express or implied (eg by conduct: Brogden v Metrop R’way Corp • Communicated (note: silence is not acceptance: Felthouse v Bindley) • Postal Rule/Instantaneous communications
Background image of page 1

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

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
7 Week 3 Summary 3. Consideration – Must be: • Essential • Present or Future, NOT past: Roscorla v Thomas (unless parties agree: Re Casey’s Patents ) • Something of value but need not be adequate ( Chappell & Co Ltd v Nestle Co Ltd ) • Sufficient • Possible of performance • Definite • Legal • Referable to the other party’s promise 8 Week 3 Summary 3. Consideration – Can be: • Practical benefit (Williams v Roffey; Musumeci v Winadell ) – Cannot be: • Moral obligation (Eastwood v Kenyon) • Part payment (Pinnel’s case; Foakes v Beer – some exceptions, such as creditors) 9 Week 3 Summary 3. Consideration EXCEPTION: Promissory estoppel Allows promise to be enforced even though promisee has not provided good consideration for that promise: Central London Property Trust Ltd v High Trees House Ltd; Waltons Stores (Interstate) Ltd v Maher 10 Week 3 Summary 3. Consideration: Exception Promissory estoppel test See Latimer pp 345 and 347 Promisee assumes existence of particular legal relationship Promisor responsible for this assumption Promisee acted/did not act in reliance on that assumption Promisor intended for promisee to act in this way Promisee will suffer loss or some detriment or harm if the assumption/expectation is not fulfilled Promisor did not take any steps to warn promisee s/he may not fulfil expectation etc 11 Today’s lecture • Intention • Terms of a contract • Exclusion clauses • Vitiating elements: mistake, misrepresentation, illegality, inequality 12 Overview - Week 4 Contract: Terms and Vitiating Elements
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 07/25/2011 for the course LEGT 1710 taught by Professor Leena during the Two '10 term at University of New South Wales.

Page1 / 13

week 4( 6 slices per page - ASSIGNMENT 1 BUSINESS AND THE...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

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