100%(1)1 out of 1 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 8 - 10 out of 41 pages.
Under the assumption that contract did not specify that Byte should have a helpdeskbased in Z, Z is unable to sue for breach in contract since setting up helpdesk was not partof the contract that was agreed upon. To make the position clearer before making the contract, Z could have had the foresightto discuss the need for helpdesk since they mentioned that the software was important to
the company. However after contract has been made, what Z can do is come up with anew contract with Byte so that a helpdesk can be based in Z.No. the lawyers would not have known what Z needs since lawyers may not know theimportance of the software to Z. Hence, what Z could have done was to go through thecontract terms to see if the contract protects them and talk to the lawyers.3.Pee Tee drives up to a multistory car park operated by ADVENTURE Mall. Afterdriving up, she presses for a ticket and a ticket is issued. The ticket states that themanagement is not responsible for any loss or theft of the car or for loss or theft ofitems inside a car or for injury to customers or passengers, arising out of the carpark’s negligenceor other breach. As Pee Tee returns from her shopping anothercustomer carelessly runs over Pee Tee’s foot with atrolley. Shortly after that whilelimping to her car, an overhead metal pipe drops on her head andinjures her. To herfurther dismay she notices that some valuables from her car have beenstolen.Answer the following questions:(a)Has the mall breached an express or implied term in the contract? Mall has breached implied term when pipe drop on head. Necessary and obvious thatcarpark operator have duty to maintain the car for shoppers. (b) Assuming it has, is the exemption clause effective in excusing it from liability?No. because exemption clause is only issued when ticket is received, thus a contract isnot binding since offer and acceptance was made without the knowledge of theexemption clause. (acceptance when driver put money, offer when ticket is issued). Foot injury- 2(1), personal injuryPipe- 2(1), personal injuryRobbery – property damage/stolen, mall liable UCtA 2(2), must see if clause isreasonable? If reasonable, excluding liability, then not responsible for loss. Which underreasonableness, can look at insurance of car, etc.(c) Would your answer to (b) be different if there was also a notice at the entranceexcluding liability in similar terms? On the assumption that the notice font size is big enough and drivers can read the noticewhile driving. Yes it would be different. Exemption clause would then be valid sincecontract was made with the knowledge of the clause.4.Fawn has a pet food shop in Clementi selling pet food. It is a small shop andpatronized by persons in the neighbourhood. As she is thinking of immigrating, shesells her business (including stock in trade and goodwill) for $200000 to AnimalFarm Pte Ltd. There is a clause in the contract which states that Fawn will not for aperiod of 5 years after the sale, set up a business relating to any aspect of the petsindustry,such as pet foods, pet accessories or pet grooming, in Singapore. After 3