The aspects are the connection or relationship between the contracting parties and the degree of imbalance between the loss suffered by plaintiff and the stipulated liquidated damages. A good relevant case is Ringrow Pty Ltd v BP Australia Pty Ltd (2005) 222 ALR 306. Ringeow and BP entered an agreement in 2005 to purchase a service station. The agreement required Ringrow to purchase fuel only from BP and allowed BP to buy the service station in case of reach of the agreement. After
Premium
For the case of Sopov v Kane Constructions Pty Ltd (No 2) [2009]‚ the appellant engaged the respondent as contractor in a construction project. The appellant repudiated the contract by wrongly calling on the respondent’s bank guarantee‚ in response to which the respondent terminated the contract and claimed damages for quantum meruit. The Court of Appeal applied the NSW Court of Appeal decision in Renard Constructions (ME) Pty Ltd v Minister for Public Works (1992) 26 NSWLR 234 which provided that
Premium Law Appeal Jury
Evaluate and Monitor the company’s Transport Performance - inova Pharmaceuticals pty ltd. Unit: TLIL1907C/TLlL2007C Implement and Monitor Transport Logistic/Develop and Maintain Operational procedures for Transport and Logistics Enterprises- Teacher: Bob Day Prepared by: Ravisanthiran Shanmugarajah Date: 13 June 2012 To: CEO‚ inova pharmaceuticals Pty Ltd Introduction iNova Pharmaceuticals(Australia ) Pty Limited‚ develops and markets over-the-counter and prescription medicines. The product
Premium Logistics Management Transport
commercial uncertainty through Australia. This essay will analysis Stevens V Brodribb Sawmilling Co Pty Ltd (1986) 160 CLR 16 decision regarding the high court process in distinguishing between whether there was an relationship between the employer of employer/employee or employer/independent contractor. Facts While working for Brodribb Sawmilling Co‚ Stevens and Gray were employed by Sawmilling Co Pty Ltd as a trucker and snigger. During 1985‚ while Gray was moving a Log onto Stevens truck‚ the log
Premium Law
ISSUES Parties: Frank and Belinda; Marie; Douglas Pty Ltd; Black; Brown & Co Issue 1: Does any of those parties mentioned above have a duty of care to Frank and Belinda? If so‚ are they liable for a negligent misstatement for the loss of Frank and Belinda? Sub Issue 1.1: Does Marie have a duty of care to Frank and Belinda? Sub Issue 1.2: Does Douglas Pty Ltd have a duty of care to Frank and Belinda? Sub Issue 1.3: Does Black have a duty of care to Frank and Belinda? Sub Issue 1.4: Does Brown
Premium Corporation Law Common law
Public Relations Oriented Security Pty Ltd[1]‚ the court of appeal was faced with complex difficulty concerning the employee’s authority either the authority of the employee is within the scope of employment or not which may resulted in vicarious liability. Material Facts The appellant‚ Mr. Sprod who was acting drunk and assaulting inside a pizza shop‚ prompted the owner of the shop to call security guards from the respondent‚ Public Relations Oriented Security Ptd Ltd. The assault occurred after the
Premium Security guard Employment Acts of the Apostles
GLENDALE CHEMICAL PRODUCTS PTY LTD v ACCC (1999) ATPR 41-672 Plaintiff: Michael Barnes Defendant/Appellant: Glendale Chemical Products Pty Ltd –Supplier of Caustic Soda which is called “DRANO” Respondent: Australian Competition & Consumer Commission Prepared By: GLENDA B. GAERLAN Presented To: PETER MCGUINNES BUSINESS LAW 1st Semester 2010 Background Facts: Michael Barnes bought a 500g of caustic soda called “DRANO” at a local store
Premium Meaning of life Law Sodium
Part A (i) the fact arises on Arthur Murray(NS) Pty Ltd V FCT (1965) 114 CLR 314 is that the taxpayer sold prepaid dancing lessons with prepaid fees attributable in part to lessons to be provided in future income years. The commissioner assessed the tax payer on the basis that prepaid fees constituted income derived by the taxpayer when received. The high court concluded that amount received in respect of service to be provided in future years are not earned until the future obligations for which
Premium Tax Taxation Income tax
Periwinkle Pty Limited Case Study A Fringe Benefit is a form of pay that employees pay employees by providing the employee to enjoy certain privileges. Providing a company car for the employee to use is a commonly used fringe benefit that is made available for management and field work workers. Also‚ the company can decide to offer cheaper prices for its employees by availing the services and products to the employees. This allows the employee to access the products of the company at a price that
Premium Employment Employee benefit Wage
YakkaTech‚ Inc. is an information technology services firm which employs 1500 people in Washington and Oregon. They are divided into two main components‚ a consulting division‚ and a customer services division. YakkaTech experienced rapid growth and consolidated from twelve small regional centers to four large regional sites. Where once they had to diagnose and resolve the customer issues on site‚ they now have the ability to investigate and resolve customer problems via remote monitoring systems
Premium Customer service Customer Employment