Australian Contract Law National Para Legal

Question: Discuss about the Australian Contract Law for National Para Legal. Answer: Introduction: Issue: The present case is about two persons named as Jane and Jack. Jane required some money so she wanted to sell her Sports car to Jack. There was nothing mentioned regarding the price for which the car was offered by Jane. So it can be assumed that the car was offered by Jane as a gift to Jack. The market price for the same sports car if it was in a very good condition was $25,000. Rule: When a person has given a promise to another person and has agreed to deliver it for some price then this is called consideration.. It is very essential that both the parties should perform their promises to make the contract enforceable. There are certain features of a contract which needs to be fulfilled so that a contract is said to be enforceable. Those features would include offer, acceptance, consideration, legal capacity and mutuality of obligation. A contract needs to have all these features to make it enforceable. If any of the above features is missing then contract cannot be enforceable (Lawhandbookorgau, 2016) Application: As we have already seen in the issue that Jane had gifted her car to Jane. There was nowhere mentioned at what price the car was offered so it was considered as a gift. If we need to decide that whether the said contract is valid as per the law then we need to apply a test. We need to test that whether all the features of a contract is present or not. If it is present then the contract is enforceable and if not then it is not enforceable. The test is performed below: Offer: Jane has made an offer to Jack to take her Sports Car. Hence this proves that offer is there. Acceptance: Jack has accepted the offer which was offered by Jane. Jack acceptance proves that acceptance is also present. Consideration: there was no price mentioned in the case so it was a gift given by Jane to Jack. When there is a gift the consideration cannot be there. Hence this proves that no consideration is there in this case. Legal Capacity: both the parties had the legal capacity of the contract. Mutuality of obligation: both the parties were legally obligated to perform their performance. But in this case only Jane was obligated to give her car to Jack. There was no obligation from Jacks side. Conclusion: There is no consideration involved in the present case hence, it is not considered as an enforceable contract. The said contract is considered to be unenforceable. Issue: The present case is about two persons named as Jane and Jack. Jane required some money so she wanted to sell her Sports car to Jack. In this case Jane has offered the same price which was offered in the market.. The market price for the same sports car if it was in a very good condition was $25,000. At the end Jack has accepted the offer which was given by Jack. Rule: When a person has given a promise to another person and has agreed to deliver it for some price then this is called consideration.. It is very essential that both the parties should perform their promises to make the contract enforceable. There are certain features of a contract which needs to be fulfilled so that a contract is said to be enforceable. Those features would include offer, acceptance, consideration, legal capacity and mutuality of obligation. A contract needs to have all these features to make it enforceable. If any of the above feature is missing then contract cannot be enforceable (Us legal, inc, 2016) Application: This case is different from the first case because here Jane has offered her Sports Car at a price of $25,000. This clearly proves that consideration is present in this case. Jack has also accepted the offer which was given by Jane. Conclusion: we have observed that all the elements are present in the said case. Consideration is present and the contract is considered to be enforceable since all the elements are present in this case. Issue: the third case was also similar to the 1st two cases with an exception for the price at which it was offered. Jane has offered her Sports Car to Jack at a very low price of $2,500. But the price which was offered in the market was $25,000. This means that the price offered by Jane was just 10% of the market price. Even in this case Jack has accepted the offer of Jane. Rule: When a person has given a promise to another person and has agreed to deliver it for some price then this is called consideration.. It is very essential that both the parties should perform their promises to make the contract enforceable. There are certain features of a contract which needs to be fulfilled so that a contract is said to be enforceable. Those features would include offer, acceptance, consideration, legal capacity and mutuality of obligation. A contract needs to have all these features to make it enforceable. If any of the above features is missing then contract cannot be enforceable.(Nationalparalegaledu, 2016) Application: This leads to the fact that most of the times, when a person is actually selling a commodity at a price, which is not as per the valuation of the car in the market. As per the market valuation of the car, $25,000 was the real amount and hence, the amount as offered by Jane was relatively very cheap and therefore, Jack had readily accepted the offer, as it was a fruitful offer. Hence, it should be said that as the market value of the car was more than the rate at what it was being offered, the car was being sold at a very cheap rate. This car could have been sold to any other person, or even to Jack at the market valuation. It greatly depends upon the offer or to determine the price of the commodity Jack would readily accept the offer, as the price of the car as per the market has been quite low. For this reason, it is effectively important to make sure that the contract has been signed between both the parties as in the absence of the same, either of the party can change its statements because of which there can be a legal suit against either of the parties. Therefore, it can be said that the most important factor has been the fact that when a consideration has been determined at an unexpected rate or price, a contract should be formed between the parties, as it would be used as proof whenever it is being required by either of the parties. Conclusion: In the present case consideration is present but still the contract would not be considered as enforceable since the price at which the car was offered was very low as compared to the price offered in the market. Issue: In the present scenario, a deal was being made between North Ocean tankers and a shipbuilder without making any adjustments for the currency fluctuations. Both the parties had decided that the payment would be made in the US dollars. During the process of making the ship, the government of America had decided to devalue the currency in order to make sure that the economy is stabilized. For this reason, the ship building company had demanded an addition amount of 3 million. It had stated that if the total amount is not actually remitted on time, the construction of the ship would be stopped and hence, the company will not be able to deliver the ship on the time. In order to avoid the same, North Ocean Tankers had decided for a fact that they would be paying the extra amount and get the ship delivered on time as they had a shipment on a nearby date. After getting the ship delivered, during the course of 9 months, the company did not demand any sort of refund for the extra 3 mill ion which was paid and hence filed a suit against the ship building company to refund the whole extra amount which was paid to them. Rule: A contract is an agreement between two parties where both the parties need to deliver their promises. It is said to be valid only when it contains all the elements. The elements which needs to be present are discussed below:(Clarke Clarke, 2016) Acceptance and offer Agreement should be legal as per the respective State Laws. Both the parties must have the intention to create binding relations. Consideration must be paid for the promise, which is made by the party. Both the parties must have the genuine consent. Legal capacity of the parties to act. If all the above-mentioned elements are present in a contract then it is considered as a contract. If any of the party has breached the terms of contract then other party is liable to pay damages to the party who has suffered damages. The Australian Contract Law does not allow the company to do any sort of an activity, which is beyond the clauses and norms as stated in the contract. All the activities, which are being performed by all the parties in the contract, beyond these clauses and rules in the contract, would be considered as illegal and hence strict action can be taken by the party to ensure that the issue regarding the same is resolved, in the most efficient way. The court of law would not allow doing such activities, which will terminate the clauses of the contract as mentioned in deed. Therefore, it can be said that any contract, which has been formulated, by two parties have to follow these certain laws and regulation as stated in the contract act to avoid any kind of an issue in the coming years or during the course of the company.(Legalvisioncomau, 2016) Application: In this case, the North Ocean Tankers should file a case against the shipbuilding company on the date when it had demanded an extra amount of 3 million, because of the fluctuations in the currency. As there were no norms in the contract regarding the fluctuations in the currency, legally, the shipbuilding company cannot demand an extra amount for the same. Therefore, it should be said that, in this scenario, North ocean tankers had all the rights to file a case against the shipbuilding company. Demanding an amount of 3 million due to currency fluctuation, even when it was not decided by either of the parties, North ocean tankers could have taken legal action against them and did not have to pay the total amount of extra 3 million for the building of the ship.(Hkclicorg, 2016) Though, they have paid the total amount, yet they are not eligible to get the same amount as refund from the shipbuilding industry. As the amount was paid irrespective of the fact that there were no provisions for the currency fluctuations, they cannot demand back the total amount paid as an extra compensation for the fluctuations in the currency of the country. The current case between the builder and the buyer is very similar to the case study of Amoco Australia Pty Ltd v Roca Bros Motor Engineering Co Pty Ltd (1973) and Foran v Wight (1989).(Australiancontractlawcom, 2016) Conclusion: In order to conclude, it should be said that the court of law would only be following the contract was signed by both the parties and they would not be considering any extra payment made to the shipbuilding company for the currency fluctuations. If North Ocean tankers had to actually make sure that they want to refund the total amount, they should have initially taken the matter to the court and had not paid the total amount of 3 million as per the agreement. No matter how strongly North Ocean tankers file a suit against the shipbuilding company, they would not be able to get the refund from them as the management of North Ocean tankers have themselves broken the clauses as mentioned in the contract signed by both the relevant parties. Therefore, it can be said that the whole scenario would be concluded with the fact that the amount paid to the shipbuilding company would not be recovered. References Australiancontractlawcom.(2016).Australiancontractlawcom.Retrieved18 August, 2016,from https://www.australiancontractlaw.com/cases.html Clarke, J.U.L.I.E Clarke, P.H.I.L.I.P.(2016).Contract Law.(3rd ed.).Australia Hkclicorg.(2016).Hkclicorg.Retrieved18 August, 2016,from https://www.hkclic.org/en/topics/businessAndCommerce/setting_up_business_in_Hong_Kong/making_a_business_contract/q1.shtml Lawhandbookorgau.(2015).The Law Handbook.Retrieved18 August, 2016,from https://www.lawhandbook.org.au/07_01_02_elements_of_a_contract Legalvisioncomau.(2015).LegalVision.Retrieved18 August, 2016,from https://legalvision.com.au/4-types-of-breach-of-contract Nationalparalegaledu.(2016).Nationalparalegaledu.Retrieved18 August, 2016,from https://nationalparalegal.edu/public_documents/courseware_asp_files/contracts/Consideration/IntroductionAndConsideration.asp Us legal, inc.(2016).Uslegalcom.Retrieved18 August, 2016,from https://contracts.uslegal.com/elements-of-a-contract/competency-and-capacity