Goldsbrough Mort v Quinn A promise to hold an offer open for a time is not enforceable (as there is no consideration). BUT option contracts have consideration for the promise Mobil Oil Australia v Lyndel If the performance of a unilateral contract has commences the offeror can revoke it but there may (Depending on circumstances) be an implied ancillary (side) unilateral contract to not revoke it which you would be in breach of Stevenson‚ Jaques & Co v McLean Inquiry as to a method of payment is not a rejection
Premium Contract Contract law
Contract Law Cases The Offer Meeting of minds: Clarke v Earl of Dunraven and Mount Earl: Yacht races. Letters sent in Communication (in writing‚ speech and conduct): Carlil v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co: pay back 100 if you get influenza. Deposit 1000 The Acceptance: Strictly in response to
Premium Contract
2nd of feb CASES MALLIK V BCC: Malik and Mahmud v Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA [1997] UKHL 23 is a leading English contract law and UK labour law case‚ which confirmed the existence of the implied term of mutual trust and confidence in all contracts of employment. Facts: Mr Malik and Mr Mahmud both worked for the Bank of Credit and Commerce International. BCCI went insolvent due to massive fraud‚ connection with terrorists‚ money-laundering‚ extortion and a raft of other criminal
Premium Contract Breach of contract
CONTRACTS ASSIGNMENT UNCONSCIONABLE BARGAINS SUBMITTED BY: KARAN SHANKAR IV Semester‚ SVKM’s Pravin Gandhi College Of Law‚ Mumbai 01 Index of authorities 03 02 Introduction 05 03 Research Methodology 07 04 Chapters 08 05 Chapters (cont) 15 06 Conclusion 17 07
Premium Common law Contract
introduced in this case. Mr. Good put up an article on The Best Daily saying that he would share half of the advertising cost for anyone who places an advertisement in Best Daily with the intention of ‘initiating major legal response to raise climate change consciousness of the people of Hong Kong’. Our client‚ Mr. Concern who responded to Mr. Good’s offer‚ placed advertisements in 15 newspapers expressing ‘support for social reform for the protection of environment’. This case arises when Mr. Concern
Premium Contract
Assignement 1 contracts Sayres v. Wheatland Group‚ L.L.C.‚ 79 Va. Cir. 504 (Va. Cir. Ct. 2009) CASE SUMMARYPROCEDURAL POSTURE: Plaintiff filed suit against defendants alleging that the contract for the construction and sale of a home that was at issue in this case was void‚ invalid‚ and unenforceable. Plaintiff also alleged that he was entitled to rescission and cancellation of the same contract. Defendants filed a counterclaim for specific performance of the contract of sale. Plaintiff moved
Premium Contract
Case Study‚ Susan v The House of Lewis Outlined below is a neutral perspective on a civil law scenario. The text will include an unbiased opinion on whether Susan had any form of contract with House of Lewis Stores LTD and a personal opinion in relation to a compensation claim. Contract law and a personal interpretation will also be discussed. The presence of a contract is only determined when a certain criteria is met‚ this is what known as the elements of a contract‚ these are as follows;
Premium Contract Tort
P85‚000.00. The pertinent provision of the contract reads: 3. For and in consideration of the use of the leased premises and above-mentioned equipment‚ the LESSEE hereby agrees to pay the LESSOR a monthly rental of EIGHTY FIVE THOUSAND PESOS (P85‚000.00) for the first year of this Contract reckoned from the date of signing. The monthly rental shall be payable within the first five days of each month without need of demand at the office of the LESSOR. In case of delay in the payment of the said monthly
Premium 1966 1970 Appeal
The ways in which contracts can become frustrated A contract may be discharged by frustration on a few circumstances. According to Section Contract Act 1950‚ there are provisions of three (3) clauses which may be the circumstances of frustration of contract. Generally‚ contract can become frustrated when an agreement to do impossible or unlawful act has been made. Referring to the Contract Act 1950‚ the three clauses provide for frustration of contract are as follow: * S57 (1) CA - An agreement
Premium Contract
CONTRACTS CONTRACT a meeting of minds between 2 persons whereby one binds himself‚ with respect to the other‚ to give something or to render some service (ARTICLE 1305) GENERAL PROVISIONS (Arts. 1305-1317) Distinguish an ordinary Contract: a.) from a Contract of marriage b.) from an obligation c.) from an imperfect promise d.) from a pact e.) from a stipulation a.) from a Contract of marriage ORDINARY CONTRACT 1. The parties may be 2 or more persons of same or different genders
Premium Contract