Pddd - recommend PDF

Preview

Summary

recommend...

Description

La Trobe University – Sydney Campus LST2BSL Introduction to Business Law and Ethics Study Period 2, 2019 Common Law Assignment

Congcongzou Student number:19133347

1.Was it a term of the contract between Mary and Five Stars Flour that the almond flour would be gluten free? (5 marks) Issue: is this a term of the contract between Mary and Five Stars Flour? the answer is yes, the almond flour ought to have been gluten free. This is a contract, Marry is a offeror, before she make contract, she already asked Richard ‘Lots of my clients request gluten-free cupcakes’,‘Is your almond flour gluten -free?’. Answer by Richard is‘Yes, of course,’ ▫ Importance of statement to parties involved; reliance on statement ▫ Language used •

Finality of statement

2.Was there an implied term in Danny and Janet's contract with Mary, that their engagement party cupcakes would be gluten-free? (6 marks) Issue :Was there an implied term in Danny and Janet's contract with Mary? The answer is:No Most of Marry customers ask for request gluten-free cupcakes, however marry don’t not that she use the almond flour is gluten-free( cause marry ask for Richard to offer the flour gluten-free). In the contract between Danny and Janet and Marry, they didn’t ask for the almond flour is gluten-free.-‘ Danny and Janet had not specifically requested gluten-free cupcakes when dealing with Mary, but they had asked for almond flour.’ So in this case, Danny and Janet’s could not say they order the almond flour would be gluten-free for this contract. 3.Was the icing colour a condition or a warranty of the contract? (3 marks) Issue : Was the icing colour a condition or a warranty of the contract? The Answer: the icing colour was definitely a condition of the contract. the buyer is required to include conditions in the contract within the legal framework-‘100 chocolate cupcakes covered with green and yellow coloured icing. ’ therefore, Marry have an conditional constraint contract-While finalising the order Kym sees the sign, which says: We accept no responsibility for breach of any warranty.So, Marry legally obliged to perform within the condition because it was within the law requirement. 4.Is Mary still responsible for the icing being the wrong colour on Kym’s cupcakes? (6 marks) Issue: Is Mary still responsible for the icing being the wrong colour on Kym’s cupcakes? The answer is yes. Mary is still responsible for the icing being the wrong colour on Kym's cupcakes. First of all, according to the subject to clause in the defects after deliver law concept, Mary failed to perform as per the contractual obligations that was within the contract requirement. Mary did not conform to the satisfactory quality that the buyer wanted in the products and from this, Mary is very much still responsible for the icing being the wrong colour on Kym's cupcakes. Secondly, because when the offer was being made, and with the fact that the contract was a conditional contract, it required Mary to conform to the conditions that were made in the contract to benefit. Law:

Suppliers or retailers are obliged to ensu re that the items sold are of “acceptable quality” (Affiliate Quality – Section 54 of the Australian Consumer Law, Section 54 of the Australian Concession Act)....