Notesale: Turn your study into money

Document Preview

Extracts from the notes are below, to see the PDF you'll receive please use the links above

---

The cases here between Marcus and Olivia, Marcus and Nina, Quentin and Marcus and Paul were all
classified as a valid, enforceable contract; how to determine that? Simply by three main components,
the first is the acceptance and offer; in all cases, Nina, Olivia, Quentin, and Paul offered Marcus business
to do specific work; with profit in return (so here is the offer
...
The second element is the intention to create
legal relations1; a good example is the Balfour and Balfour case which explains how the absence of the
intention to create a legal contract occurs2
...
Finally, the consideration3 is
clarified in the Currie v Misa case, encapsulating the term as "right, profit, or benefit accruing to the one
or same forbearance, determent loss a responsibility is given undertaken by the other party
...
For example, in Nina and Marcus' case,
Nina's consideration was to pay 15000 pounds, and Marcus renovated Nina's house
...
However, some defects and
mistakes will occur to create problems with remedies and voids of a contract we will discover during this
project
...
Contract Law: Text, Cases and Materials (2018, OUP)

2

Balfour and Balfour [1919] 2 KB 571

3

Ibid to 1

4

Currie v Misa (1875) LR 10 Ex 153; (1875-76) LR 1 App Cas 554

5

Ibid to 1

Marcus and Nina
Once a contract is established, it is necessary to comply with the contract clauses without making
changes6
...
Did Nina have the legal right to
refuse to pay the fees she agreed with Marcus due to a contract breach?

Under Consumer Rights Act 2015, section 11(1), 'every contract that contributes goods by description
must be treated as described in agreement terms
...
11(1) proves that Marcus has breached the
contract as his duty was to clear the rooms of all the old furnishing and decoration, place new carpets,
and paint the walls
...
In addition, s
...
8‘ Nina would not refuse to pay Marcus if she approved the breach
...
" So that here, Nina has to reject Marcus's
work as it doesn't comply with the agreement9
...
Hoenig agreed to do decoration with outstanding half of the fees on
completing the work
...
As a result, Issac refused to pay the remaining fees
...
Therefore, the employer was entitled to pay the contract fees and
deductions for the defects 10
...
Bolton v Mahadeva case applies to Marcus; yes, Marcus has made

6

Ibid to 1

7

Consumer Rights Act 2015 s
...
11(5)

9

Arcos Ltd v EA Ronaasen & Son [1933] AC 470

10

Hoenig v Issacs [1952] All ER 176

11

Bolton v Mahadeva [1972] 2 All ER 1322

an effort, but still, he didn't reach the aim he and Nina agreed to perform, so there wasn't adequate
performance from Marcus12
...
Marcus agreed with his client Nina repair the three
bedrooms in Nina's house, as £15,000 are given to Marcus when completing his work
...
He also didn't extend curtains and other furnishings in the
other two rooms
...


Talking everything, Marcus is found guilty of breach s
...
But Nina has also breached the
contract when terminating the agreement by hiring Marcus's competitor, had the following options
under s
...
15 However, Nina breached the contract and terminated it without Marcus
agreement
...
19(3)

Marcus And Olivia
Olivia had specific aspects for her window, but Marcus caused damages on construction not as agreed
...
For the
claimant, no, that's not what I paid for, so his legal right to get what he wanted, on the other hand, the
defendant was terminating with no profit
...
Mustill Lord
Judge announced in this case that 'this case provided a one-of-a-kind situation in which, despite poor
performance, the cost of rectification would be ridiculous
...
Lloyd LJ: While the purpose of damages is ordinarily
irrelevant, it may be taken into account for determining reasonability
...
He won't gain any profit, yet he is
entitled to put £5,000 to improve the window to comply with what he agrees with Olivia
...
17" Let's stop here and ask will Olivia agree on the modifications of the agreement?

Moreover, Marcus has reached the aim of designing a window
...
Marcus will be liable to repair the window,
which costs £15,000 to remove
...
23(2b), 'if the consumer demands the trader to repair or
replace the trader must afford any essential costs in doing so (comprise the unavoidable price of any
employees, materials or postages
...
23(6)19
...
Marcus accepted Olivia's offer, as Olivia wished to have a roof window in her garage that allows
light to get into her garage possibly; Marcus designed her a window
...
However, the window was perfectly inserted
...
Olivia could deduce
Marcus's profit or ask Marcus for repairment, and he is liable to do so
...


Marcus and Paul
When a party signs into a contract, they must be restricted to it despite the fact they have read the
agreement or not, Maugham LJ20
...
Marcus was still late now; he is liable to pay Paul the agreed price as
liquidated damage
...
Therefore, if any breach occurs to
value the violation, it must be clarified in the contract; liquidated damage protects the innocent party
and avoids breach of the agreement
...


Triple Point Technology Inc v PTT Public Company Ltd [2021] here, the Supreme court held that PTT was
liable to liquidated damage since the completion date had ended
...
Therefore, if the
liquidated damages began to result at the same time as the contract coming to an end, they would not
be taken away despite the fact parties haven't made any express provisions for what will take place over
termination22
...
Still, Marcus was late two days to complete the apartment renovation
...


20

E’Strange v F Graucob Ltd [1934] 2 KB 394 E

21

Ibid to 1

22

Triple Point, Inc
...
Still, later on, he fails to complete his work,
and Marcus has offered Quentin's to pay him back all his money because we can't complete the
job; however, Quentin is adamant that he only wants Marcus to do that work as they agreed
...
The intention to create a legal relation means that the parties must have a
willingness to their agreement to have an enforceable contract; if the contract is held between the
parties without the intendment to create an agreement, the warranty is void
...
In
contrast, the following components to create a valid contract were established: the offer and
acceptance, consideration, and the intention to create a legal association
...
If Marcus
didn't work as clarified in the agreement, this would be considered he breached the contract;
Marcus thought he would refund Quentin with the charge Marcus took and he the contract
...
Now Marcus doesn't have any
willingness to continue his work
...
25
Now the contract is void due to the absence of the intention to create a legal agreement
...
Lau Yiu Long, where Lord Scarman stated well known that duress 'is coercion of
the will, as a result, abolish consent
...
As in North Ocean Shipping Co
...
Hyundai Construction Co
...

In Barrelliv v
...
In the
case of Times Travel (UK) Ltd v Pakistan International Airlines Corp, it was ruled that duress

24Ibid

to 1

25

Ibid to 1

26

Pao On v
...

Marcus and Quentin's agreement is now illegal due to two factors, the absence of intention to
create legal relations and economic duress; both factors void the contract between the parties
...


28

Barrelliv v

---