Bulaw1502 Fundamentals Of Law And Assessment Answers

Answer:

The case presents very interesting facts that should be addressed by the rule of law. The facts of the case are that Jimi had contacted Rollinstone to come and offer him some electrical services that he required as he was used to. However, due to the fact that the company had changed ownership and now was owned by Eminem there were a number of changes that the clients had not been informed of that led to a number of inconveniences. First of all, when Jimi contacted approached Rolling stone for their services and agent who was supposed to provide professional advice and conduct a quotation of which they would present to client who would in turn sign the same and the services would be initiated. However, in this case the same did not happen since the supplier claimed that they had not received the mail early enough due to an ongoing postal workers strike. Therefore, Jimi had to incur increased cost due to the delay of the project he was overseeing. The supplier also stated that Jimi that more costs had to be increased due to the fact that the requirements that Jimi needed would need an external contractor with expertise to be involved in the project. This was not the case in the contract that Jimi had earlier on signed and therefore there was need to seek some legal advice on the next cause of action he ought to have undertaken. Jimi needed to know whether there were any legal avenues he would follow in order to have the terms of the contract effected.

There are a number of rules of law that Jimi can make use of in order to seek justice and have the terms of his contract implemented. One of the rules of law that he can apply in order to seek justice is the application of the postal rule (Sweeny et al., 2007). In this rule it is assumed that one a contract is assumed accepted as soon as the mail is deposited at the post office. This rule was applied in the Adams v Lindsell (1818) 1 B & Ald 681 whereby the judge ruled that it would be deemed that an offer as been accepted when the offeree deposited the acceptance letter with the post office unless the same was stated otherwise in their initial agreement. In the case scenario that has been presented it is essential to note that Jimi had deposited his acceptance with the post office early enough and the same was delayed as a result of a post office workers strike that was going on. Therefore, Jimi assumed that the electronic supplier was aware of the accepted offer and therefore expected his deliveries to be undertaken in time, However, Rollingstone’s management claim that the same was delivered late and therefore could not initiate the process before that. There was no agreement arrived at earlier on that required the parties to first wait for the letter to be delivered before the offer was to be assumed accepted.

The other rule of law that can be used in the case scenario is that of innominate term. The innominate term is a term that is not expressively stated by the agreement but comes up as a result of the circumstances that arise (Eisenberg, 2006). Therefore, it is important to note that when one party breaches an agreement there are some damages that can be awarded by the court to the aggrieved party without necessarily the need of the term being expressed in the contract entered into (Whincup, 2006). There are a number of prayers that the injured party can pray in any case they think that there has been a breach of contract. One of the issues they prayers they can request is that of terminating the contract and requesting the other party to cater for the damages incurred. There are cases in which the innocent finds it difficult to continue working on the contract due to a number of factors. The other request that the innocent party can request for is that of the specific performance (Worthington, 2000). The injured party can request the court to order for the party that has breached the contract to act as per the contract. This will ensure that the other party will be able to receive the services or goods that were agreed for in the agreement. In the case of Hong Kong Fir Shipping Co Ltd v Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd (1962 2 QB 26) the judge ruled by applying the rule of innominate term. The aggrieved party was awarded damages caused by the other party (Koffman & Macdonald, 2010). In this case, Jimi can request for the application of the innominate terms clause in order to ensure that he was awarded damages by the court. Although, the damages that he would incur as a result of the delay in completion of the project he was undertaking were not expressively presented in the signed agreement there was a need to ensure that the court understood that he was to incur costs as a result of the breach of agreement by Rollingstone electrical company. The court should consider the precedence that has been set by previous court decisions.

The court should also be able to determine whether the initial costs that were presented to Jimi should still be used or whether he should be able to pay for the increased costs. This is because earlier agreed agreement the cost that were quoted were not that high (Beale et al., 2007). Therefore the court should be able to determine whether the contract was binding or not.

In conclusion, it is important to ensure that there are a number of elements that make up a contract. Therefore in this case, Jimi should be able to seek legal intervention by applying a number of principles that have been discussed above. One of the principles that have been discussed is the postal rule. In this principle it is assumed that one as accepted an offer as soon as they deposit the same with the postal services (Watnick, 2004).  Jimi in this case had deposited his acceptance with the postal services but the same was delivered at a later time due to the postal workers strike (Lindgren, 2016). Therefore, Rolling stone should have begun delivering their services early enough to prevent breaching the contract they had entered in. The other doctrine that has been highlighted on the case discussed above is that of innominate terms. In this doctrine, there are a number of damages that should be awarded by the court even though the same was not expressed by the contract entered to (McKendrick, 2014). This are the damages that were not expected but occurred as a result of one party failing to perform as expected. In this case, Jimi was to suffer damages as a result of the delays that would occur due to Rollingstone’s failure to perform as outlined in the contract. All these doctrines have previously been provided for in precedents and therefore it is important that the same is upheld.

References

Adams v. Lindsell, 1 B. & Ald 681 (1818).

Hongkong Fir Case, 1962 Q.B.2 26 (1962).

Sweeney, B. J., O'Reilly, J. N., & Coleman, A. (2007). Law in commerce. LexisNexis Butterworths.

Watnick, V. (2004). The Electronic Formation of Contracts and the Common Law Mainbox Rule. Baylor L. Rev., 56, 175.

Eisenberg, M. A. (2006). The disgorgement interest in contract law. Michigan Law Review, 559-602.

McKendrick, E. (2014). Contract law: text, cases, and materials. Oxford University Press (UK).

Koffman, L., & Macdonald, E. (2010). The law of contract. Oxford University Press.

Beale, H. G., Bishop, W. D., & Furmston, M. P. (2007). Contract. Oxford University Press.

Whincup, M. H. (2006). Contract law and practice: the English system with Scottish, Commonwealth, and Continental comparisons. Kluwer Law International.

Lindgren, K. (2016). A time difference between Australia and England: Urban 1 (blonk street) Ltd v Ayres. Commercial Law Quarterly: The Journal of the Commercial Law Association of Australia, 30(2), 10.

Worthington, S. (2000). Personal property law: text and materials. Hart Publishing Limited.

Bradbrook, A., MacCallum, S., & Moore, A. (2002). Australian real property law. Australia.