Jessica Java Sample LR Trail PDF

Preview

Summary

This is a sample research trail of re Jessica Java...

Description

LROPW-JAVA-2122-02-SAMPLE LR TRAIL

Legal Research and Opinion Writing Jessica Java Sample legal research trail This document traces the research steps taken to enable me to advise Jessica Java following her accident. She seeks advice on liability and quantum of damages for PSLA. Jessica is a child for the purposes of legal procedure.

Steps taken: 1. I recognised Negligence as a correct cause of action without the need to research it. 2. I recognised a potential second cause of action as Breach of Contract. Knowing that Jessica was a child at the time of any contract being entered, I researched whether this was a bar to her entering a contract or recovering contractual entitlements. Resource: Chitty on Contracts Volume 1 34th Ed. Prof Hugh Beale, law correct as at 26 October 2021 (but checked for currency below). Search terms: -

Contract Children Minors Capacity Recover Entitlement Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999

The keyword “minors” returned the following results at 11-006: 1

© City, University of London 2021

LROPW-JAVA-2122-02-SAMPLE LR TRAIL

•

If a minor is to enter into a contract…the minor must at least be old enough to understand the nature of the transaction: R. v Oldham Metropolitan BC Ex p. Garlick [1993] A.C. 50.

•

Contracts entered into by a minor are voidable at the minor’s option, i.e. not binding on the minor but binding on the other party: Proform Sports Management Ltd v Proactive Sports Management Ltd [2006] EWHC 2903 (Ch).

I chose Status Check on Westlaw to confirm positive treatment of both these decisions. This confirms that Jessica is capable enforcing against Mr Legg the terms of a contract between them. Alternatively I already knew that s.1(1) Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Acts 1999 enables Jessica to enforce the terms of a contract to which she was not a party, but had the benefit: 1.— Right of third party to enforce contractual term (1) Subject to the provisions of this Act, a person who is not a party to a contract (a “third party”) may in his own right enforce a term of the contract if— (a) the contract expressly provides that he may, or (b) subject to subsection (2), the term purports to confer a benefit on him. Currency of this law was checked on Westlaw’s “Compare versions”. Only one version of the Act has existed since coming into force on 11.11.99 so today’s version of the Act can be applied in Jessica’s case. A third option in which Mr Java contracted with Legg as Jessica’s agent, will engage basic principles of agency law (not researched because so well established). Currency of statutory terms under Consumer Rights Act 2015 3. I knew that Mr Legg’s duty was to provide his contractual services with reasonable care and skill, but only if he was doing so as a trader: ss.48(1) and 49(1) Consumer Rights Act 2015. “Trader” means for purposes relating to his trade, business, craft or profession: s.2(2) CRA 2015. I also knew that if Mr Legg was acting as a trader, anything said or written about him or his service would be a term of the contract if taken into account by Jessica when deciding whether to enter the contract, or making later decisions about the service being provided: s.50(1) CRA 2015. Currency of this law was checked on Westlaw’s “Point in Time” function. I opened the Act, selected “Point in Time” and inserted the date of the accident into “select version to display”. The displayed version was the same as at today’s date. This was also confirmed when displaying the ss. 2, 48 and 49 by the words “Law in force, version 1 of 1, 1 October 2015 to present”.

Currency of the law on terms implied by Common Law 2

© City, University of London 2021

LROPW-JAVA-2122-02-SAMPLE LR TRAIL

4. I knew that if Mr Legg could not be proved to be a trader, Jessica could rely on common law terms about his contractual duty to her, implied under principles contained in Attorney General of Belize v Belize Telecom Ltd [2009] 1 WLR 1988). I checked the currency of those principles by inserting the case name into Westlaw. The principles are not recorded as attracting any negative judicial comment in later cases (which, being contained in a Privy Council decision, would not be expected). Procedure in the event of a claim given that Jessica is a child 5. Under CPR r.21.2(1) Jessica must have a litigation friend to conduct proceedings on [her] behalf unless the court makes an order under paragraph (3). Under 21.4(3) if nobody has been appointed by the court…a person may act as a litigation friend if he (a) can fairly and competently conduct proceedings on behalf of the child or protected party; (b) has no interest adverse to that of the child or protected party. Under 21.10 if a settlement is reached after a claim is issued it must be approved by the court. I confirm that these rules are current as of today’s date.

Legal Issues 1. Was a contract formed between Mr Legg and Jessica Java? 2. Was a contract formed between Mr Legg and Mr Java? 3. If a contract was entered between Mr Legg and Mr Java, did Mr Java do so as Jessica’s agent? 4. Was the friendship between Mr Legg and Mr Java a bar to a contract being formed between them? 5. Did Mr Legg provide his services as “trader”? 6. As to the scope of Mr Legg’s duty (contractual or tortious): -

whether his duty began to run at the start of the journey to the lesson venue, or only at the start of the lesson;

-

whether his duty included the protection of Jessica from injury, or only advice on riding technique;

7. Whether there was contributory negligence on the part of Jessica and, if so, how much?

Name:............................ Date of research: …..................... 3

© City, University of London 2021...