Bus 206 Project 3 Contract Law PDF

Preview

Summary

Bus 206 Project 3 Contract Law Analysis Essay...

Description

Contract Law Analysis

Contract Law Analysis Southern New Hampshire University

Contract Law Analysis After reviewing the scenario, I believe there are still elements of a valid contract between The Friendly Dawg and landlord Lou. The first element of a contract is intent, the offeror would be Lou and the offeree were originally Dave Dawgs late father. The next element of the contract is consideration, the lease between Lou and The Friendly Dawg was to rent out the space in exchange for $500 a month. Since both parties are receiving something of value this would be the consideration (Kubasek, N. K., Browne, M. N., Dhooge, L. J., Herron, D. J., & Barkacs, L. L., 2020). The next element for determining if a legal contract is legally binding is the capacity of the people or persons entering the contract. Since both Lou and Dave’s father were of legal age to enter a contract, nothing is known about the mental state of each person so nothing can be said to confirm or deny their ability to enter a contract to rent out the space. The last element of the contract between Lou and Dave’s father is the lease that was signed to host the pet supply store in the area that Lou had available. Based on this information I believe a contract is still in existence between Lou and The Friendly Dawg. Without reading the contract between Lou and The Friendly Dawg I don’t believe there is any defense to the enforcement of the contract. I do believe that Lou has some obligations to ensure that the building systems are functioning correctly and as intended. However, the area that the animals are being kept was intended to be used as a storage area for goods to be sold by The Friendly Dawg, not as an area for live animals. The Friendly Dawg does appear to be in breach of the contract because the original lease describes the business as a pet supply store only. With the addition of live animals for sale this is a new element that would require extensive work to make this into a safe place to sell live animals. In order to make renovations to the space Lou should have been informed and many permits would have been required by the city in order to make these changes in the storeroom. When Dave stopped paying rent, he breached the contract,

Contract Law Analysis the storeroom was never intended to be a place to store live animals. This could be grounds to for Lou to evict The Friendly Dawg. The current remedy for the issues between The Friendly Dawg and Lou would be to have the store go back to a pet supply store. Then have Lou work with Dave to create a new agreement that includes the sale of live animals. This is needed because the building would likely need certain upgrades in order to accommodate the live animals and keep all tenants safe and happy. What doesn’t help Lou is that during the renovations to the store Lou stopped by and asked an employee what was going on and was told they were expanding. Lou then told the employee, “Very exciting! Good luck!” When looking at the scenario and determining if the elements of a valid contract exist between Lou and Jasmine, we need to consider all the elements and the information provided. First, we must consider the agreement we are told about between Lou and Jasmine, Lou verbally offered to rent space to Jasmine for $300 a month. Since Lou made the offer and Jasmine accepted the offer the agreement has been made. Secondly, we must look at the consideration between Lou and Jasmine, Lou is renting our space to Jasmine in exchange for $300 a month. Since Lou is receiving monetary benefit and Jasmine is receiving the space this is considered the consideration. Thirdly, we consider the parties contractual capacity while it does mention that Lou and Jasmine met in a bar one night there is nothing that suggest either party was incapacitated and not able to make an agreement. The final element of a contract is the legal object, while there is no lease agreement that has been formally signed between Lou and Jasmine a verbal agreement was made. While oral contracts are still valid, “written contracts provide certain advantages oral contracts lack” (Kubasek, N. K., Browne, M. N., Dhooge, L. J., Herron, D. J., & Barkacs, L. L. 2020).

Contract Law Analysis Lou maybe able to use the defense of proper form when it comes to Jasmine and her yoga studio, while there was a verbal agreement to rent the space for $300 a month. The claim that Lou told her she could rent from him forever and that he would never evict her would be tough to cooperate unless there were more people at the bar that night that could back up Jasmine’s claims. With Jasmine not paying rent and the statement from the bar that night I believe that Lou would be within his rights as the landlord to evict Jasmine. One remedy for the issues between Lou and Jasmine would be to enter into a written agreement about what are the responsibilities of Lou as the landlord and Jasmine as the tenant. When it comes to the ability to evict either party I believe that Lou would have had the ability to evict The Friendly Dawg if he had been giving them notice about the noise complaints since the other tenants were able to peacefully enjoy the space they were renting. Since the employee of The Friendly Dawg informed Lou of the expansion, and Lou wished them good luck the tenant use of the premises would not be in jeopardy since Lou knew of the expansion. Lou should have probably asked additional question about what the expansion entailed. With the expansion the of the space that is specifically used by the tenant the tenant is usually responsible for those improvements, so the necessary HVAC requirements for the live animals would be the responsibility of The Friendly Dawg. With the stop in rent payments I believe that Lou would have the ability to evict The Friendly Dawg. Jasmine and Sunshine Yoga has a legitimate grievance with Lou about the added noise from the now live pets at The Friendly Dawg. Also, when the snake escaped through the air vent and went into Sunshine Yoga that created an unsafe place to conduct business. Lou does not have the ability to evict Jasmine as the area she is renting is unsafe and has caused many of her clients to cancel. If Jasmine is not able to retain clients for her services due to the condition of the building, she would be unable to pay rent for a space she can’t use.

Contract Law Analysis Works Cited Kubasek, N. K., Browne, M. N., Dhooge, L. J., Herron, D. J., & Barkacs, L. L. (2020). Dynamic business law (Fifth ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education....