Aspects of Contract and Negligence for Business - An Evaluation - Assignment Example

Aspects of Contract and Negligence for Business Task 1 Peter has sought your advice as to whether he can force “Techno Products” to sell him the computer for £1.00. In giving advice you must focus on the law relating to offer, acceptance and consideration Overview of the Case A small company named ‘Techno Products’ has been involved with the business of selling computers at discount rates. The company with declining profits has advertised that the first ten customers will be provided with one of its highest specification computers at £1 irrespective of the fact that the retail price of such computer is £3000. Contextually, Peter waited in front of the shop and he was the first customer to claim for the highest specification computer at £1. In this regard, the sale assistant of the shop informed Peter that the advertisement was not meant of serious ground and that an individual of sound mind would not think of purchasing computer at the rate of £1. Critical Evaluation From the aforementioned case overview, it can be comprehended that the case is related to contract law. There are certain elements that are identified to be essential for the formulation of a valid contract. The four essential elements that are essential for a valid contract are offer along with acceptance, legal considerations, legal purpose and legal capacity. In this respect, a contract to be valid is required to have the aforementioned factors under consideration. Moreover, the elements of contract are required to be complied with the objective of ensuring that the contract is legally accepted (Marson, 2013). In relation to the case provided, it can be affirmed that Peter has not entered into a legally recognised valid contract, which implies that he is not liable to force the company in selling the product that has been advertised. Thus, Peter cannot force the company to provide the product at the price of £1. It can also be affirmed relating to the case that the advertisement made by the company is just a mere invitation. According to the contract law, the advertisements that make by the companies in relation to a product or service are often related with the notion of ‘invitation to treat’. ‘Invitation to treat’ is identified as an expression along with willingness to develop or enter into a contact with another individual. Moreover, the invitation should be made with appropriate terms as well as conditions with the objective of ensuring that the offer made by the offeror is accepted by an offeree. Contextually, an ‘invitation to treat’ is not identified as an offer but it is recognised as a preliminary procedure. In this regard, an ‘invitation to treat’ is not a necessary procedure of developing an agreement as the offeror making the ‘invitation to treat’ capable of forming a valid contract. ‘Invitation to treat’ is generally used by businesses to improve sales figures and attract customers through advertisements and auctions among others (Marson, 2013). In this context, Peter is not liable for forcing the company in having the specified computer at the determined price mentioned in the advertisement. Moreover, the advertisement published by the company was not a promise or a statement depicting that it will offer the product at a determined discount rate under legal considerations. Respectively, the advertisement made by the company can be treated as ‘invitation to treat’, implying that Peter cannot force the company to provide the product on the basis of the mentioned advertisement price. However, Peter can make an appeal to the court about the advertisement and the liability of the company in providing the product at the determined price. Peter is required proving to the court that the company is bound to provide the product at the discounted price as per the advertisement (McGraw-Hill Education, 2013). Contextually, Peter proving to the court about the promise will be facilitated with the opportunity of forcing the company in providing the product at the price of £1. Specially mentioning, the advertisement which published by the company does not possess any contractual term including conditions, warranties and innominate terms. It can be viewed that the published advertisement of the company only stated that the first ten individuals visiting the store will be able to purchase highest specification computers at a price of £1, whose actual retail price is £3000. According to the UK law, the above stated contractual terms cannot be viewed to remain present in the advertisement made by the company, representing no legal considerations. Moreover, the advertisement does not possess any warranty and innominate term on the basis of which Peter can make an appeal to the court (Weitzenbock, 2012). Thus, it can be concluded that Peter without adequate evidences cannot force the company in providing the specified computer in the stated price of £1. Task 2 Jack has sought your advice as to whether he can force “Telephones Are Us” to replace/repair the telephone and whether he is bound by the 12 month contract. In giving advice you must focus on the relevant statutory provisions protecting consumers who purchase goods from businesses Overview of the Case Jack has purchased a mobile telephone from a local shop named ‘Telephones Are Us’. The purchase was made on a contractual basis for a term of 12 months without going through the terms and conditions that have been mentioned in the contact. After making the purchase, Jack identified that the purchased product has faults and it is not working properly. In this regard, Jack visited the shop and asked for replacement or repair, but the sales assistance informed that he have to pay for the repair services. Critical Evaluation From the case scenario provided, it can be apparently observed that Jack has entered into a contract with “Telephones Are Us” while purchasing the product i.e. telephone from the shop. In this regard, certain essential elements are necessary to be taken into concern in order to enter into a valid contractual agreement. In this regard, the contract between Jack and the shop is determined to be valid as the offer made by shop has been accepted by Jack. The contractual agreement possessed the mentioned terms and conditions on the basis of which the services relating to repair and maintenance will be offered for the purchase of products that are made from the shop. Furthermore, the contract amid Jack and the shop possesses all requisites elements that are essential for a valid contract including offer along with acceptance, legal considerations, free consent and legal purpose (websu-kat, 2009). According to the case provided, it can be affirmed that Jack after signing the contract has entered into a valid contractual agreement with the shop. Contextually, as per the norms that have been depicted in the contract, Jack cannot force the shop to replace or repair the telephone, as one of the conditions in the contract clearly mentioned that the shop will not be liable for providing repairing or replacement services in any circumstance within the provided contract period. Additionally, the condition also stated that the customer should provide the costs that are associated with repairing along with replacement. The applied conditions in the contract will be applicable for the contractual period i.e. 12 months. The Sales of Goods Act (SOGA) 1979 under the UK law system implies that retailers and sellers are required to provide quality and fit products to customers. According to this law, customers are offered with legal rights to go for a refund, replacement as well as repair services in certain case wherein the products that have been purchased do not match with the product description and quality. The SOGA has been enacted with the purpose of ensuring that customers are protected from malpractices and other irrelevant operations of retailers or sellers from selling defective and faulty products (Crown, 2008). In this regard, Jack with the assistance of SOGA will be facilitated with the opportunity of forcing “Telephones Are Us” towards replacing or repairing the purchased telephone. Subsequently, Jack may appeal to the court on the ground that defective product has been provided to him by the shop. The SOGA also implies that the products that are offered to the customers should be in accordance with the description and the quality that are prescribed by the shop. Thus, it can be ascertained that Jack in accordance with SOGA would be able to avail repair along with replacement services on behalf of the company (Freeman, 2005). In accordance with the case provided, it can be apparently observed that certain terms and conditions have been depicted in the contractual agreement while selling the phone to Jack by the shop. In this regard, the terms and conditions have been made based upon the notion that the company does not have the liability for replacing or repairing the product, if it is found to be in a faulty position. This particular situation can be related with the notion of exclusion clause. In accordance with this clause, the offeror limits or excludes certain responsibilities that are to be offered to the offeree (Bellamy, 2009). In this context, it can be affirmed that the shop with the provision of not accepting the liability for offering free repair and replacement services has limited its responsibility. In this respect, Jack cannot force the shop to replace or repair the telephone as he already signed the contract without reading it, wherein it was clearly mentioned that it is the customer who have to bear the replacement or the repairing cost of any faulty product. Apart from these, it can also be affirmed that Jack is bound by the 12 month contract as the contract was already been signed by him without reading it fully. Task 3 Patricia wishes to bring a claim in negligence against the train driver. Advise her as to what she must establish to bring such a claim and her chances of success Overview of the Case In accordance with the case provided, Patricia was traveling in a train of a train company named ‘Safe and Steady Trains’. The train met with an accident and thus Patricia suffered a broken leg. It can be affirmed that the crash was due to the result of the negligence of the train driver, as he felt asleep while driving. Critical Evaluation According to the case scenario, it can be comprehended that the case is applicable under the tort law of the UK. Tort law generally falls under the UK civil law, which has been developed with the intention of protecting individuals from the conduct of wrong doings of others (Dekker, 2007). The main objective of the UK Tort law is to compensate the injured party. However, the wrongdoer is not legally punished in this law as in the case of criminal law. Additionally, there are certain remedies that are available under tort law such as injunctions. This implies that tortfeasor, a person who has convicted tort, is legally obliged to limit and minimise activities that breaches tort (FindLaw, 2012). In this regard, the train accident can be related with the notion of ‘tort of negligence’ on the part of the train driver. The ‘tort of negligence’ implies that an individual will be subjected to hold liable for conducting careless activities, causing harm to another individual. In relation to the UK legal system, the tort law can be applicable in all cases of accidents, which can be identified under the aspect of tort ‘law of negligence’. In this regard, there are certain elements that are essential for individuals to claim for compensation under ‘tort of negligence’. The first element is duty of care, which signifies that an individual should conduct activities in a liable and careful manner with the intention of ensuring that no harm is caused to other individual. The second element is breach, which signifies that the acts of carelessness should be proved on the part of an individual responsible for performing the assigned tasks. The third element is damage, which represents that damage or loss that has been suffered by an individual i.e. claimant should be proved. The fourth element is causation, which implies that there should be a linkage between breach in duty of care and damages suffered (Cilex, 2012). Contextually, Patricia suffered a broken leg, which is due to the negligence of the train driver. Thus, from the case scenario, it can be comprehended that the case covers all the required elements of negligence in an appropriate manner. Thus, Patricia with the assistance of ‘tort of negligence’ can appeal for compensation for the damages that she experienced. The concept of negligence is often identified as a liability in tort and it is quite different from the idea of contractual liability. In this regard, a contractual liability usually binds the parties in a contractual agreement in a legal manner. On the other hand, liability in tort implies that a person entrusted with certain tasks should act in a responsible manner with causing harms to other individual (Blackwell's, 2013). Therefore, this case might fall under tort liability as the train driver of the company is liable to ensure the safety of the passengers in their journey. In this regard, the train company can be held liable for paying compensation to Patricia, as the train driver is an employee of the company who is covered under liability insurance. Liability insurance is identified as an important consideration in the field of accidents taking place in roads and homes among others. Additionally, from the case, it can be ascertained that the train crash was mainly caused due to the negligence of the train driver. Respectively, Patricia with the proof of the fault of the train driver and damages caused can appeal for compensation from the company, even it became liquidated (Lewis & Morris, 2012). Thus, based on the above discussion, it can be affirmed that her chances of success would be quite high in establishing the claim of compensation only after the damages along with the fault of the driver are proved. Task 4 Advise Paula as to any action that can be brought under legislation relating to occupiers’ liability and whether and damages award might be reduced because of any possible contributory negligence on her part Overview of the Case The case depicts that Paula on her visit to ‘Pushing and Pulling Ltd’ for the purpose of a job interview fell over an exposed cable near the reception area. The company was a solely operating company in the building but was not owned. Moreover, it can be viewed that there was no notification for visitors about the exposed cable lying over the area, which might aid visitors in taking adequate precautions. Critical Evaluation From the case scenario provided, it can be comprehended that the incident of tripping over the exposed cable is a result of negligence on the part of the management of the company. This case can also be applicable under the tort ‘law of negligence’. In tort ‘law of negligence’, certain principles require to be taken into concern for making claims that include duty of care, breach of duty of care and damages suffered by claimants due to breach of duty performed by other individual. Moreover, the law of vicarious liability will also be applicable in this case (Neyers, 2005). Respectively, the employer of the company will be held liable for the act of negligence, as observed in the incident of Paula tripped over the exposed cable that was running across the reception area. Vicarious liability implies that the liability is imposed on an individual such as (B) for the tort act performed by another individual (A). It is often regarded as a process on the basis of which an employer of a particular business is held liable for the fault of employees, even if the employer is not personally liable for making the fault. In this regard, it is the duty of the employees to seek that the exposed cable is repaired. Additionally, it is the responsibility of the employer of the company to seek that the employees perform their actives in an appropriate manner. The employer is entrusted with the responsibility of safeguarding its employees and others who are associated with the company. In this respect, the exposed cable may cause harm to employees and others visiting the reception area. Additionally, the management team of the company should have undertaken adequate steps or measures in order to repair the cable and other appropriate measures with the intention of alerting others about the exposed cable. Consequently, Paula can prove that there is a linkage between the risks of exposed cable and the reason for tripped over it due to the negligence on behalf of the company. Thus, Paula on the basis of the aforementioned facts can appeal for compensation that can be brought under legislation relating to occupier’s liability (Rose, 2009). It can also be affirmed that the damages award might be reduced by taking into concern the contributory negligence on Paula’s part. As Paula is under the medication of a virus and preferred to take medicine with food, her intake of medicine without food on the interview day might have contributed to her falling over the cable. Thus, based on this ground, the damages award might be reduced because of her contributory negligence relating to medication. References Blackwell's, 2013. Negligence – Introduction. Formulation of a General Duty of Care. [Online] Available at: http://bookshop.blackwell.co.uk/extracts/9780199211364_lunney.pdf [Accessed December 07, 2013]. Bellamy, J., 2009. Exclusion and Limitation Clauses in Business Contracts. Articles. [Online] Available at: http://www.39essex.com/docs/articles/Exclusion&Limitation_Clauses_in_Business_Contracts_Presentation_Paper_JBellamy_071009.pdf [Accessed December 07, 2013].    Cilex, 2012. Level 6 - Unit 13 – Law of Tort. Final. [Online] Available at: http://www.cilex.org.uk/pdf/FINAL%20SA%20for%20the%20Web%20Tort%20Jan%2012.pdf [Accessed December 07, 2013]. Crown, 2008. Sale of Goods Act 1979. Whole Act. [Online] Available at: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1979/54 [Accessed December 07, 2013]. Dekker, S., 2007. Just Culture: Balancing Safety and Accountability. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. Freeman, J., 2005. The Sale of Goods Act 1979. Lawworks. [Online] Available at: http://www.probonogroup.org.uk/lawworks/docs/training/autumn07/Consumer%20handouts%2003.10.07.pdf [Accessed December 07, 2013]. FindLaw, 2012. What Is Tort Law? Home. [Online] Available at: http://www.findlaw.co.uk/law/government/constitutional_law/500400.html [Accessed December 07, 2013]. Lewis, R. & Morris, A., 2012. Tort Law Culture in the United Kingdom: Image and Reality in Personal Injury Compensation. SSRN Cultures. [Online] Available at: http://orca.cf.ac.uk/26836/1/SSRNCulturesJuly2012.pdf [Accessed December 07, 2013]. Marson, J., 2013. Business Law. Oxford University Press. McGraw-Hill Education, 2013. Formation of a Valid Contract. Chapter 3. [Online] Available at: http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/dl/free/0070961379/580512/Willes_2Ce_03.pdf [Accessed December 07, 2013]. Neyers, J. W., 2005. A Theory of Vicarious Liability. Alberta Law Review, Vol. 43, No. 2, pp. 1-41. Rose, P. T., 2009. The Evolution of Vicarious Liability in Tort in Respect of Deliberate Wrongdoing. Articles. [Online] Available at: http://www.oldsquare.co.uk/pdf_articles/3100178.pdf [Accessed December 07, 2013]. websu-kat, 2009. Essential Elements of a Valid Contract. Business Law. [Online] Available at: http://www.websukat.com/pdf-files/Business-law/Essential-methods-of-a-valid-contract.pdf [Accessed December 07, 2013]. Weitzenbock, E. M., 2012. English Law of Contract: Terms of Contract. Norwegian Research Center for Computers & Law. [Online] Available at: http://www.uio.no/studier/emner/jus/jus/JUS5260/v12/undervisningsmateriale/Terms.pdf [Accessed December 07, 2013]. Read More