Contractual Law Analysis

Question 1

Exemption clause

On the basis of cited case situation, Donna is running the Cloakroom. In this, Donna has responsibility to give a ticket to the persons who handed over the piece of clothing. In this, number was mentioned in the front side of ticket and states on the reverse side. Hence, on such ticket exemption was clearly mentioned such as '' we do not take responsibility or liability for clothing checked into our cloakroom. Give case entails that Travis who was an amazing star handed over his hat to Donna and received a ticket. At midnight, when Travis went to cloakroom to collect it then he found that there was not. Moreover, in cloakroom, Donna confused about the person to whom he was given the hat of Donna. In this, Donna demands for the compensation from Enterprise cafe in relation to the hat worth of $200.

Hence, in this case situation Enterprise cafe would be liable to give compensation to Travis for the replacement of hat. In the case of La Rose v. Nudrill Pty Ltd. (2013) it was held by the court that an exclusion clause mentioned at the back of the receipt shall be valid and operate to restrict the liability to pay damages (Exclusion clauses in commercial dealings, 2013.). However, it cannot be construed to protect any of the parties against their negligent acts. However, in the event the clause has been included in the agreement specifically to restrict the liabilities form negligent act shall be considered valid. cannot free itself from the liability to take proper care in against to the exemption clause. Moreover, ticket is only a receipt and exclusion clause was not incorporated into a contract (Smets and Jarzabkowski, 2013). On the basis of this aspect it is the responsibility of the cafe and Donna to perform their activities with high care. Further, Donna is required to check the number of tickets and thereby give clothes to the suitable person. Hence, by including the exemption clause Enterprise cafe cannot limit its liability towards the guests. Thus, Enterprise cafe is legally obliged to give compensation of $200 to Travis.

It can be stated that exclusion clause is a kind of exemption which is generally used at the time when people or parties enter into the contract. Furthermore, it plays very vital role in reducing or excluding liabilities of a person/party regarding performance during certain conditions or situations. It can be stated that there are certain circumstances which are being excluded as per this clause and these are considered as exclusion. However, it can be critically argued that these are the clause which are generally in written form and it clearly indicates that fact that in parties entering into contract will not be liable or cannot be held liable in certain happenings. For instances if a person has taken membership and has joined gym,  the common form of contact clearly highlights the fact that owner of gym will not be responsible in situations where a person or the member gets injured while doing exercise. On the contrary of this, it can be critically argued that parties and person in contract are required to take care of the fact that the exclusion clause remains valid only in certain situations.  First and foremost among all is that exclusion clause is required to be inserted into contract in the best possible manner. Apart from this, parties entering into contact also need to take care of the fact that the exclusion clause inserted are not contrary to law.

Question 2

The given case situation entails that in the special drink party Donna served To Boldly Go cocktail to me and Adam that contain high quantity of alcohol. Still, being a director me and Adam   continuously talk with the guest. In this, Seamus who was invited in the party has not consumed any alcohol at all. Seamus ran Italian restaurant which was not performed in a well manner. In the party, Seamus said to me and Adam in relation to offering the pizza. In this, offer has been made by Seamus about giving pizza oven worth of $5000. Hence, in this, offer has been accepted by both me and Adam in relation to the purchasing of oven worth of $5000. Further, due to intoxication me and Adam fallen over another guy which presents that in this we were not in condition to take decision.               

In the next morning, oven was delivered by Seamus to Enterprise cafe. Hence, by considering such situation it can be said that there was no contract has been made between the directors and Seamus. Moreover, at the time of the formation of contract me and Adam was not in condition to think in a proper way. Hence, considering the judgement of Blomley v. Ryan (1954) it can be concluded that a drunkard person shall be considered as intoxicated and shall not be competent to enter into a valid contract (Capacity to Contract, 2016). Also in the case of Gibbons v. Wright (1954) it was noted by the court that such contract might not essentially be unfair, but may represent a situation of lack of understanding.Individual was highly drunk and due to this reason this type of person is not eligible to enter into any form of contract. Apart from this, in case if person enters into contract then it is regarded to be void. Considering the case associated with Blomley v. Ryan (1954) any individual who is drunk is not able to enter into any type of contract.  Thus, at the time when me and Adam took alcohol were not in a condition to form a rationale judgement. Hence, such agreement which was made between the directors and Seamus is completely void. On the basis of the essential elements of contract due to the incapacities of the parties agreement would not be enforceable by law.  

Question 3

In the case situation, it is clearly mentioned that Enterprise cafe decided to sell T-shirt and mugs. On the basis of case, Donna was assigned with the task to put the price tag on coffee mug and t-shirts such as $5 and $35. In this, Donna mistaken and attached incorrect signs such as on T-shirt $5 and coffee mug with $35. On the basis of this, one day Peter who loves Star Trek saw t-shirt and approached Donna with the aim to purchase 5 t-shirts @ 5 each. Hence, it is considered as an invitation to treat on the basis of AGC (Advances) Ltd. v. Mc Whirther (1977), wherein the court distinguished between the concept of offer and invitation to offer. It was specifically opined that an offer constitutes to be one of the essential elements of the contract and non-existence of a valid offer shall render the whole contract repudiated. However, an invitation to offer does not constitute to be an elements of the contract, rather it is merely an invitation to the public in general to make offers to the shopkeeper. Hence, in such cases the shopkeeper shall essentially make an acceptance of such offers to make a binding contractual agreement. Further in the case of Blackpool & Flyde v. Blackpool Borough (1990) it was held that products on display in the shops make an invitation to treat, in response to which the consumers might make an offer, which may or may not be accepted by the shopkeeper. Generally in any type of agreement it is analyzed in terms of offer and acceptance. One party which is considered as offeror makes an offer which is one accepted by party the offeree.  For instance if goods displayed by the firm along with the price labels are considered as an invitation. In this, seller has complete authority to either accept or reject the proposal which was made by an offeor or other party (Jones and Sufrin, 2014). In this, court clearly mentioned that offeor or seller is not obliged to offer products for which offer was made. On the basis of this, Donna and owner of Enterprise cafe has right to deny to Peter for the T-shirt. Thus, the present case clearly reflects that owner of Enterprise cafe is not obliged to sell T-shirts to Billie @ 5 each.  

Question 4

Case scenario presents that being a director decision had taken by me in relation to terminate the employment of Donna. Moreover, in the past, Donna performed several mistakes such as losing hats, mixing up signage and getting us drunk etc. Hence, scenario entails that at the time of leaving the organization Donna said to me that she started to join another cafe which was situated on the corner. Along with this, she also claimed that high level of and best efforts will be made by her to make remarkable contribution in the growth and development of restaurant. On the other side, in the  employment contract, it was clearly mentioned that she has no authority to join another cafe which was established within the radius of five kilometres for the period of 24 months from the date of employment. Employment contract is generally regarded as the agreement between employer and employee that set out terms and conditions of employment. It is possible that contract can be either in written or in oral form. This type of contract is most commonly used in the private sector for higher level of job and in case of senior employees it can have adverse impact where weak relationship between employer and employee can adversely affect the entire contract. Apart from this, in the present case Donna undertook large number of mistakes which takes into consideration mixing up of signage, losing hats and getting drunk. Further, at the time of leaving job Donna said that she is joining another cafe which is being situated at the end of corner. Therefore, considering the overall terms and conditions linked with employment it has been found that Donna has broken the employment law where she was working in another cafe at a time and helped the authorities in development of same.Therefore, this is the major issue linked with violating the terms and conditions. In case if any individual works in particular organization then at same time it is not possible to work in any other organization and person is not allowed to participate in other business affairs

Hence, the same was signed and agreed by Donna at the time of joining Enterprise Cafe. Thus, it is considered as an express terms in which all the terms and conditions are inserted and agreed by both the parties at the time of the formation of contract. Thus, by referring the case of Thornton V. Shoe Lane Parking (1971) it can be stated that clause which was mentioned in the contract can be enforced by law. Further, it was opined that an express term may not be discussed by the parties, but if mentioned in the contract or mentioned as a written term it shall be considerd as an express term. Hence, in this, being a director all the aspects related to employment are mutually discussed with Donna. Hence, she has no right to join another restaurant within the area of five kilometres for the period of 12 months.  

Question 5

By referring the case situation it has been assessed that there are mainly three requirements which landlord have to fulfil in writing are enumerated below:

Exclusive possession: It is one of the main ingredients of lease which must be present in the agreement. Exclusive possession implies for the right which was provided by the landlord to the concerned authority in relation to making use of the premises.

Determinate term: In accordance with this aspect it lessor is required to mention the commencement period on leasing agreement. By referring the case of Furness v Bond (1888) it has been determined that agreement in relation to the lease will be voided unless the starting date was not mentioned on it (Vago, 2015). Thus, leasing agreement must contain information regarding the period of lease.Term less than that of grantor: It entails that the period of lease agreement will be less than the right that gantor possess. Hence, ending period of the lease must be present in the agreement.Along with all such aspects lease provider needs to mention clear information regarding the landlord insurance and furnitures. Hence, by including such information lessor can make the contract more valid.  

Question 6

In this case, director wants to install old cinema row seats alongside long tables. These seats are setting down in pair of 4 and bolted. Such furniture will not be unbolted and moved around because it would involve lots of work. On the basis of this aspect it is assumed that there were no aspects mentioned in the agreement related to the fixing the furniture which cannot be moved. Hence, by considering such aspect it can be said that it is the accountability of the owner of the restaurant to take away the seats while vacate the premises (Hiltunen, 2012). Moreover, under lease, lessee has responsibility to perform their activities according to the contractual aspects. Hence, in the case of default landlord has right to make sue on the owner of restaurant for compensation.

Conclusion

From the above report, it has been concluded that both the parties of lease is required to perform according to the contractual terms and condition. Besides this, it can be inferred that by including exemption clauses parties to the contract cannot limit their liabilities. In case of Domma she has broken the employment contract where individual was working in some other organization and supported them in their development activities. As per other scenario director wishes to install old cinema with row seats around side table. But no such aspects were present in the agreement which are linked with fixing of the furniture and it is the moral responsibility of the owner of the restaurant to take away the seat while they were vacant in the premises. 

References

• Hiltunen, R., 2012. The grammar and structure of legal texts.
• Jones, A. and Sufrin, B., 2014. EU competition law: text, cases, and materials. Oxford University Press (UK).
• Pistor, K., 2013. A legal theory of finance. Journal of Comparative Economics. 41(2). pp.315-330.
• Smets, M. and Jarzabkowski, P., 2013. Reconstructing institutional complexity in practice: A relational model of institutional work and complexity. Human Relations. 66(10). pp.1279-1309.
• Vago, S., 2015. Law and society. Routledge.

UPTO50%

Avail The Benefit Today!

To View this & another 50000+ Free Sample

Enter Email

Submit