LAW

Assessable topics

Question 1

Introduction

The rehabilitation of Will has been a success and he went out to celebrate with his friends. However, he had agreed not to consume alcohol and has brought his own drinks and water. Unknown to him, his friends had spiked his drink with GHB. This resulted in the increased intoxication of Will and upon arrival to his home; Joyce was able to understand that he had relapsed. The Australian Contract Law will be used to assess the situation. She was upset and told him that he had breached the clause 1.1.3 not to drink alcohol ever again. He argued that he was not aware that his friends have spiked his drink and says that it was not his fault. In the case analysis the breach in contract is to be determined.

Rules

The breach in the contract is seen in the case of Will even though he was not aware of the situation was created by his friends. Australian Competition and Consumer Commission
v Quantum Housing Group PtyLtd has shown the usage of the ACCC.Section 21 of the Australian Contract Law has been included in this case.The alternative argument stated above was the basis for His Honor’s approach to the problem[1]. The extra law has been reached the range by ACCC, and the competition has been boosted. Due to investors’ reliance on Quantum to obtain their incentives, Quantum took advantage of its stronger negotiating position in comparison to investors. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission filed a lawsuit in federal court against Quantum on the grounds that the company made false or misleading statements and engaged in repeated unethical behavior. In the end, the accreditation requirements were enforced by The Quantum. The purpose of requiring a security deposit was to keep out items that Quantum had not authorized. The verdict was appealed to the Full Court by the ACCC. The fines weren’t challenged. A contradictor was chosen to present evidence opposing the appeal in order to help the full court. In this case, the ACCC has praised the ruling because it offers improved protection for consumers and small businesses according to the Thorne v Kennedy [2017] HCA 49; 263 CLR 85. Quantum’s behavior sufficiently deviated from proper business practices to be against or to offend conscience.

Application

The construction of the clause in the contract is correct for the side of Will. This is because the clauses that are mentioned have been followed by him. The promise not to do something was maintained by Will and he was unaware of his friends. There is no consideration as according to Joyce there is no value between each other. The last clause that is never to touch drug again was not fulfilled due to the action of his friends as per Thorne v Kennedy[2017] HCA 49; 263 CLR 85. Taking into consideration the fact that Will did not want to consume alcohol the clause has been upheld by him. The relationship of the parties and the legal names are required for the writing and drafting of the commercial contract[2]. As the outcome of the contract was the gaining of piece of land by Will, the clauses were followed by him. The terms of the payment have been included in the agreement. According to the clause, Will was not supposed to drink alcohol anymore and only then the contract will be fulfilled[3]. The provisions of the contract of sales shows that the payment and the credit terms. Even though the restrictions are placed in the clause and Will has agreed to the terms and conditions, the violation of the clause will be seen. As the attachment was not sent to him at first, the drafting of the contract has been deemed incorrect.

Conclusion

It can be concluded that the violation of the clause 1.1.3 has been seen in the case of Will. The investment property contract contained all the essential elements and three clauses that were all fulfilled by Will except the last one. As he had drunk without his knowledge, the violation of the clause should not be considered.

Question 2

Introduction

The misinterpretation of the clause of the agreement by Joyce has resulted in Will wanting to draw and terminate the contract a day before settlement. This is because Will is not satisfied by the conduct of his mother and insists that he had been following the contract absolutely. The termination of the contract can be taken up in this case. The termination of the will is not possible even if the prima facie is applied in the case.

Rules

The termination of the contract can be taken up by the parties after the consultation. The agreement of both the parties by the form of agreement or consent is required for the termination of the contract. Under the contract law in Australia a notice should be given by the party who wants to terminate the contract to the other party so that they are aware of this situation. In this case the rescission of the contract can be taken up[4]. The misinterpretation of the clause or a term in the contract can result in the rescission of the contract as seen in Commercial Bank of Australia v Amadio
(1983) 151 CLR 447; [1983] HCA 14 (High Court of Australia). This case used the relief based on the grounds of the unconscionable conduct. The mistake, fraud or any illegal action can be applied and the termination of the contract will be processed. The rewinding of the decisions that were taken up under the contract will be done and the contract will be declared null and void. The main purpose of this is to bring the parties involved in the contracts to the starting position as soon as possible so that the continuation of the contract can be done without any severe loss.

Application

The rescission of the contract can be taken up in the case of Will and Joyce. The misinterpretation of the clauses and the timing mentioned within the contract was done by Joyce resulting in the inappropriate conduct of Joyce he can terminate the contract[5]. This is because the burden of proof as seen by Joyce who is asserting that Will had broken the contract by drinking that is present with one party can be done by Will. In the initial examination the legal claim that is made by Will has to be backed up by certain evidences that will help in the proceeding to the trial or judgment. The evidence of prima facie evidence can be produced by Will, even though Joyce can bring up the proof that he was drunk and had breached the clause. The initial claim of terminating the agreement will be dismissed as there will be no response of the other party that is Will.

Conclusion

It can be concluded that even though Will wants to terminate the contract based on the prima facie on the conduct shown by Joyce, the terminating of the contract will not be possible. This is because the evidence provided by Will is not sufficient for the proving that he had not breached the clause of the contract. In case there is an agreement that the existence of prima facie is valid the presence of the evidence will have to e showed by Will.

Question 3

Introduction

The rehabilitation of Will is successful and the contract was to be signed on the due date. To celebrate Will went out with his friends and celebrated. After persuasion of the friends Will had been forced to drink. Upon drinking he realized that he did not like that taste of alcohol and had stopped. Unfortunately, at that moment Joyce came in the pub and noticed this, encouraging her to terminate contract. Will however, denies that his mother cannot terminate the contract and is of the opinion that the breach will not be taken into consideration.  The possibility of termination of the contract has been taken up and the impact on the contract as a result of termination has been discussed.

Rules

The termination of the contract by Joyce is possible. This is because according to the Australian contract law and the Australian contract lawthe identification of the clauses that the other party has failed to perform amounts to the fundamental non performance, the other party contains the right to terminate the contract. The reasons for believing of the non performance should be proved and the other party should be notified about the breach and the intention of terminating the contract. In case the performance is nit offered or confirmed to the contract, the party that is aggrieved will be in the loss as they cannot terminate the contract[6]. The provision of a correct notice within a specified period of time should be given to the other party, so that they are aware of the situation. The termination in the contract can be seen as the release of both the parties from the binding of the contract. The termination of the contract will not contain the payment for the damages that have been incurred in the non performance. The reclamation of the restitution of the other party is applied.

Application

It can be seen that the contract can be terminated by Joyce as she can prove that Will was in violation of the clause according to which he was not supposed to drink alcohol. However, the relapsing of Will had been seen by Joyce. Both can argue their perspectives. Joyce can argue that the breach in the clause has been done by Will which makes Joyce correct to terminate the contract[7]. However, on the other hand, Will has the power to argue that the he had not continued to drink after he realized that he did not like the taste any more. The termination of the contract by Joyce will result in the releasing of both the parties from the binding of the contract. The claiming of the restitution by either of the parties can be taken up. The restitution will be based on the receiving that the other party has. The consideration of the damages and the suit for rescission can be taken up. The revival of the contract is not possible after its termination.

Conclusion

It can be concluded that the contract can be terminated by Joyce based on the breach in the clause by Will. The both sides can argue about the correct decision making regarding the contract. Will can argue that he had not been drunk in the given period of time and that he had stopped drinking after realization.

Question 4

Introduction

Jonathan and Will were brothers and had Will had thought highly of him. Jonathan had proposed that he wanted to buy the property after Will had gained the right or otherwise he will proceed with the termination of the training contract. Will after he had signed the contract and has become the owner of the land, he signed away the option to Jonathan which made him the owner of the land.

Rules

The law that can be used in the case is extortion. It can be seen as the common law offence that is expressed under the fact that the extraction of the property from another by the means of threatening and use of coercion. The Australian contract law tells about the extortionwhen a person with an intention to obtain something that will result in the loss of the other person. The influencing of the intention over the exercising of the public duty can be seen under this law[8]. The reasonable grounds of the other person should be validated so that the extortion is preceded. Under the subsection 2 of section 249K, it can be seen that the person who is guilty for anoffence and the person has threatened the other person for the omitting of indictable offence. The guilty of blackmailing the other person should be considered in the extortion.

Application

The common law that can be applied for the case of Will is the Crimes Act of 1990. According to that the option that has been provided by Will shows that he had signed the contract that has given him the right to transfer his property to Jonathan. The option is voidable[9]. This is because according to the subsection of the 249K, the offence against the subsection 1 that includes the person has created any accusation or has provided any threat to Will can be taken into consideration. If Will can prove that he had been blackmailed by his brother, Jonathan is reliable to pay a huge fine and penalty when fund guilty.

Conclusion

It can be concluded that the blackmailing of Will by Jonathan can be considered a criminal aspect and the crimes Act of 1990 can be taken up for its penalty. The intention and the purpose of Jonathan once proved can help Will get justice and the intention to steal can be outlined.

---

Get expert help for 70211 Contracts Final Exam and many more. 24X7 help, plag free solution. Order online now!