Business and Company Law

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Business and Company Law

By Name

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Question 1

  1. In the case of Adam against Dot, Adam may make an argument that he had all reason to believe that he was safe from the point where he was seated and that he was not exposed to any danger. Adam may also argue that he had all reasons to believe that the stadium was safe for his health and no harm would get him while in the stadium. Adam will argue that Dot owed him a duty of care since he was Dot’s Visitor and thus must compensate him (Mallor, 2016). The defenses that Dot may claim in this case is that he made it clear to Adam on the rules of the Game. It is likely that Adam will carry the Day in this case
  2. In the case of Adam against Brad, Adam may make an argument that the player ought to behave in a responsible manner that his actions would not harm the spectators. In this case, Adam will argue that Brad had a duty to use his helmet in the manner that it is supposed to be used in the game, other than any purpose that the helmet is intended. Brad on the other hand may claim a defense for “none fit injuria” that Adam by going to the baseball stadium had consented to the dangers and cautions of the game (Rush & Ottley, 2012). It is likely that Adam will carry the day since the injury caused by the helmet was not out of an ordinary course of the game.

 

Question 1

  1. The word law refers to a set of principles and procedures that guide the actions of individuals towards others
  2. b) The three classifications of law include
    1. written and unwritten law
    2. common law and law of Equity
    3. substantive and procedural law
    4. Public law and private law
    5. Civil and criminal law
    6. Municipal and international law
  3. The three main components of private law include
    1. law of tort
    2. law of contract
    3. Law of Trust

Question 2

  1. The effects of treating a company as separate legal entity is that it can own property, it sue and can be sued, it can lend, borrow and transact business in its name and is treated as artificial human being with rights as those of a physical human being (Mathur, 2010).
  2. The doctrine of “Lifting up the Corporate Veil” means that in the event that a matter is brought before the court of law, the courts does not rely on the companies who are the parties to the case but goes to the extent of establishing the true owners and shareholders of the company who are interested in the outcome of the case (Latimer & CCH Australia Limited, 2011).

Question 3

  1. An offer can be terminated in the event that
    1. the offeree reject the offer
    2. reasonable time provided for the offer has elapsed
    3. in the event of death, disability of incapacity of the offeror
    4. the offeree makes a conditional acceptance
    5. the offer faces illegality
  2. Invitation to treaty means that the offeror has expressed willingness to get into a contract but does not constitute an offer to get into a contract.
  3. Terms of a contract are the terms, condition, responsibilities, warranties and duties or expectation of each party to the contract. Exemption clause is the provision that stipulates the way in which one of the parties may not be bund to the terms of the contract (Emerson, 2012).
  4. Three conditions of capacity to enter a contract
    1. be of sound mind and free from mental illness
    2. be an adult and age maturity
    3. Be sober and not under the influence of drugs or alcohol (Marson & Ferris, 2015).

Question 4

The hotel had the legal duty of care to take care of Raffle and his property while he was the guest at the hotel. The law of contract does not recognize such declaimer as the one that appeared on the receipt that Rafael was issued with since it is against the law of contract. The fact that Rafael was issued with a valid receipt with a different registration number other than that of his car indicate that the hotel is negligent (Dransfield, 2013). Rafael had a right to sue in case his car is damaged. Since the car was stolen under the knowledge of the car park attendant of the hotel, Rafael can argue that the negligence of the hotel attendant was the cause of the wrong registration and thus has the right to claim compensation (Jones, 2013).

Question 5

  1. From the case of Janet, it is clear that she entered into the contract while under hallucination, which impaired his judgment of the terms and conditions of the contract (Gillies, 2014). This makes the entire contractual illegal and non-binding and thus the move by the solicitors of Singa to make Janet sign the contract of sale of the bungalow was not in good faith. Janet can sue form not implementation of the contract on illegally and invalidity grounds. (Clarkson, 2011).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bibliography

Clarkson, K. W. (2011). Business law: Text and cases. Mason, Ohio: South-Western.

Dransfield, R. (2013). Business law made easy. Cheltenham, UK: Nelson Thornes

Emerson, R. W. (2012). Business law. Hauppauge, N.Y: Barron’s Educational Series.

Gillies, P. (2014). Business law. Sydney: Federation Press.

Jones, L. (2013). Introduction to business law.

Latimer, P. S., & CCH Australia Limited. (2011). Australian business law 2012. North Ryde,

N.S.W: CCH Australia.

Marson, J., & Ferris, K. (2015). Business law.

Mallor, J. P. (2016). Business law: The ethical, global, and e-commerce environment.

Mathur, S. B. (2010). Business law. New Delhi: Tata McGraw Hill Education.

Rush, J., & Ottley, M. (2012). Business law. London: Thomson

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: