80.2K

Verified Solution

Link Copied!

At a nightclub you bump into a person standing next to you and spill their drink. You both realise you are classmates who met through your group assignment in Comlaw 101. He accuses you of being a clumsy idiot and blames you for the poor grade the group received. He threatens to beat you up. To save yourself you promise him $50 if he does not attack you. He accepts. Which statement best describes your legal position? You have to pay because you clearly intended legal relations as you understood the situation and your classmate has provided consideration for your promise to pay him $50. You do not have to pay because your classmate has not provided consideration for your promise. You do not have to pay because the contract was entered into after you had been drinking. You were under the influence of alcohol and had no ability to create a legal relationship. Your classmate has taken advantage of the situation to influence your decision. You have to pay the $50. Not being beaten up is a benefit to you so your classmate has provided consideration for your promise. In the middle of the pre Xmas rush, when you are rushed off your feet serving customers, your boss compliments you on your hard work and promises you a Xmas bonus. You thank him and keep working. At closing time on Xmas Eve the boss says, I'll put $100 in your pay packet next month by way of a bonus as I promised. Again, you thank him but when you receive your next pay there is no sign of the extra $100 promised. What is your legal position? The bonus is unenforceable because at the time bonus was originally promised the amount was uncertain. Courts will not enforce contracts where the terms are uncertain and a method of ascertaining the extent of the terms is not specified. You are not legally entitled to the bonus as under the principle explained in the case of Re McCardle [1951] Ch 669 you have not given consideration for the boss's promise. You are entitled to the bonus as you have given consideration for the bonus. A promise of a bonus is just a promise of a gift and is not legally enforceable. Andy persuaded his grandmother Mabel to sell him her car for $1,000. Both parties knew that the car was worth a lot more than that. Mabel didn't need the car and wanted to help her only grandson so she agreed to sell. A week later she discovered that Andy was planning to sell the car to a friend for $7,000. What are her potential claims against Andy? Misleading and deceptive conduct in terms of s9 of the Fair Trading Act 1986. Fraud. Misrepresentation under the Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017. Undue influence. Tem sold his 'Star Wars' collection to Jed. The terms of their oral agreement made on Day 1 were that, on Day 14, Tem would deliver his 'Star Wars' collection to Jed's house and at the same time Jed would pay Tem, by cheque, the price of NZ$34,000. On Day 12, Tem realises he can sell his collection to Janice for a higher price so he tells Jed he will not deliver the goods on Day 14 or at all because there was no consideration for their agreement. On Day 13 Jed brings an action in court against Tem for breach of contract. Which one of the following is CORRECT? There is no consideration because, by the authority of D&C Builders v Rees [1966] 2 QB 617, payment by cheque is not regarded as sufficient; For the purpose of deciding whether there was consideration, the promisor is Jed; There is a contract and Tem is in breach of it even if he decides against selling to Janice. There is a contract but it has not been broken because Jed brought his action before delivery was due

Answer & Explanation Solved by verified expert

See Answer