Dr. J Abedin (Bus & Comm Law: KL) 1 HOME WORK CA PROFESSIONAL STAGE (Knowledge Level) (9thBatch) Business and Commercial Law Contract and Agency Problem Scenario Questions Question No: 1 Richard, an impoverished university student, and his millionaire father enter into an arrangement where Richard agrees that he will keep the front- and backyards of the family property mowed, and he will 'do a bit' to keep the gardens looking tidy. In return, his father agrees to pay him weekly allowance of $200. His father had previously used a garden contractor to do the job and paid him $350. They live on a one-hectare property, and the mowing alone takes half a day a week. After four weeks, Richard's father tells him that he can't afford to pay $200 a week. He says that Richard should be doing the work for nothing, as it is the responsibility of the whole family to look after property; besides, he says, Richard is getting free board and lodging. Advise Richard. Question No: 2 Peter and Marry were engaged to be married. Prior to the marriage, Peter agreed to make Marry a dress allowance of $1000 a year, to be paid in quarterly installments of $250. Peter paid the allowance for the first three years of their marriage, and then he stopped payment. After Mary had separated from Peter, she sued to recover $4000 arrears of the agreed dress allowance. Do you think she is entitled to recover the money? Question No: 3 David was unemployed and suffered from a number of disabilities. To try to get him back into the workforce, Sam arranged for David to paint his (Sam's) house. The arrangement was initially to be on a trial basis in order to determine whether David was capable of doing the job. Under the arrangement, Sam agreed to pay David $25 per hour as a starting rate; if he proved that he could complete the could complete the task, they would then discuss the rate of payment again. As David was climbing a ladder to start the painting, he fell off it and was injured. Is there a contract of employment in existence so that David would be entitled to claim workers' compensation? Discuss.Dr. J Abedin (Bus & Comm Law: KL) 2 Question No: 4 Could an officer sent by the fax be accepted by letter if the offeror had not specified a particular method of acceptance? Give reasons. Question No: 5 Explain what is required for an offer to be validly accepted. Question No: 6 Explain why the rules as to acceptance differ between contracts by post and instantaneous communication. Question No: 7 How a businessman that make offers protect themselves from the risk of loss associated with the rules of offer and acceptance by post? Question No: 8 On 7 March, Brendan sent a letter by express courier to Sydney offering to buy fabric from Steven. At the foot of the letter he added: 'Please write and return by express courier whether you accept my offer'. The letter was delivered to Steven on 8 March, and he wrote accepting the offer. However, instead of giving the letter to the express courier, Steven sent it by post. An express courier letter would have arrived back in Melbourne on 9 March, but the letter of acceptance did not arrive until 12 March. On 15 March, Brendan replied to Steven's letter saying that he had bought his requirements of fabric from elsewhere. Steven claimed that there had been a breach of contract. Advise Brendan as to his legal position Question No: 9 Jenny received a circular from Beauty and the Beast Hair Salon advertising massages and manicures for $10. Realising that this was an exceptional good deal, but not surprised because she knew that they had only just opened and were running a number of good opening specials, she rang and made a booking. When Jenny arrived at the salon she was told thatDr. J Abedin (Bus & Comm Law: KL) 3 there had been a mistake on the circular and it should have said $100. The manager of the salon explained that this was still a good price because normally a massage and a manicure would have cost $150. Jenny was furious, as it had taken her 30 minutes to get to the shop by car and if she had known it would cost $100, she would never have made the booking. Advise Jenny. Would your advice have been any different if Jenny had the massage and manicure before being told that the cost was $100? Would she have to pay the full price? Question No: 10 Is the equitable principle of promissory estoppel likely to be applied widely and freely, or only special situations? Question No: 11 Consider the following situations and indicate whether consideration is present and whether Jack has an enforceable agreement: a. Jane is going overseas and she offers to give her Lotus Super 7 sports car to Jack. The market value for this type of vehicle in good condition is around $25000. Jack accepts. b. Jane offers to sell Jack her lotus super7 sports car for $25000. The market value for this type of vehicle in good condition is around $25000. Jack accepts. c. Jane offers to sell Jack her Super 7 sports car for $2500. Market value for this type of vehicle in good condition is around $25000. Jack accepts. Question No: 12 Margaret owned an antique store that specialised in rare porcelain dolls. When she opened the business in 1989, it was a shop in an eastern suburb of Melbourne. In 1999 she started to advertise on the internet and by 2006 the business had grown to the point where she needed help to keep the business going. After a family discussion one night in the kitchen table in July 2006, it was agreed that Margaret would probably keep the business going for another couple of years and then retire. Emily, her youngest daughter and aged 16, would work in the shop as long as was needed and in return, she would receive any unsold dolls. When Margaret retired at the end of 2009, she decided that she would give the unsold stock to charity and they could auction it and keep the proceeds. Advise Emily.Dr. J Abedin (Bus & Comm Law: KL) 4 Question No: 13 David, a developer, borrowed $ 100 000 from Rees for a development project with which he was associated. The terms of agreement were that the money would be repaid within 120 days at 14 % interest. At the conclusion of the 120 days, David told Rees that he would be unable to pay the full amount as the development hadn't sold as well as had been expected. He offered to pay $90 000 by cheque immediately in full settlement of the debt. Rees accepted. Rees subsequently claimed the balance of $10 000, plus the interest. David argued that he shouldn't have to pay any more because he had paid Rees under one of the exceptions to the Foakes v Beer principle (that is payment in a different kind) and the doctrine of promissory estoppel operated to protect debtors such as himself from the problem. Who is correct here- Rees or David discuss.