Commercial Law – Case study

Paper , Order, or Assignment Requirements

It’s a case study about two cases based on Australian legislation.

QUESTION 1 (13 marks)
The following communications passed between Eddo Products Co, a New Zealand business based in Auckland, and Vestley Co, a business based in NSW.
1. Letter posted on November 1, and received by Vestley Co on November 5, from Eddo Products Co: “Please quote us price per tonne of canned mango fruit Grade B”.

2. On November 6 Vestley Co replied by letter: “We can supply canned mango fruit Grade B at $900 per tonne. Cans are in 50 gm, 100 gm and 150 gm sizes and your order would consist of a fair distribution between these sizes. Delivery would be in equal monthly shipments commencing on February 2”. This letter was received on November 12.

3. Eddo Products Co sent an email on November 13: “Your offer to supply one tonne of canned mango fruit Grade B is accepted. Our formal order follows”. This email was received on the same day.

4. On November 19 Vestley received an order form from Eddo Products ordering one tonne of canned mango fruit Grade B. The order form stated:

 

Can sizes must consist of a fair distribution of sizes as specified by you in your letter of November 6”.
Printed at the foot of the order form was the following: “All orders subject to the standard contract terms of the International Fruit Trading Association”.
5. Vestley Co sent an email on November 16: “Thank you for your order. We note your acceptance of our terms”. The email was received on the same day.
You are required to discuss the following:
a. Is there a concluded contract between the parties? 9 marks for discussion of the legal significance of each of the communications.

b. If there is a concluded contract, what are the terms of that contract? 4 marks

In your answer state the legal effect of each communication.
You are to assume the law of NSW applies.
Refer to relevant legal authority in support of your answer.

QUESTION 2 (12 marks)
Becky owns a suburban parking station. The station is managed on her behalf by Tom, although Becky occasionally acts as manager. At the entrance to the station an automatic machine issues customers with a ticket which has printed on the front:
‘Customers are kindly requested to note that vehicles are parked only on the conditions displayed on the premises’.
The conditions are displayed on a notice attached to the wall of the office to which customers go to pay the parking fees prior to removing their cars from the parking station.
The notice reads:
Condition of Parking
The station is open from 7 am to 10 pm daily except Sunday. Charges are $5 per hour or part thereof; for vehicles left overnight an additional fee of $250 is payable.
Becky regrets that neither she nor her employees can accept any responsibility for any harm, loss or damage whatsoever.
When customers pay the parking fees they are given a document headed ‘Receipt’ which indicates the amount paid and also repeats the words of the notice on the wall.
Con, Debbie and Friedrich all recently parked their cars at the parking station. They had each used the station about once per month over the past year, but had never read the ticket, the notice or the receipt (all of which have been in use in exactly the same form throughout this period).
Con’s car was stolen when a thief persuaded Becky he was the owner of the car and had lost his ticket, whereupon Becky allowed him to drive the car away. The car has not been recovered. Con becomes very angry when Becky said to him: “I have no liability. Check your receipt and the notice on the wall”
When Debbie came to collect her car, Tom, the manager of the station on that day, was assisting another customer who had trouble parking his car. During this process Tom carelessly drove over Debbie’s foot, causing her considerable injury.
Friedrich got into a drinking session after work at the local pub, forgot all about his car until after the station had closed, and was outraged when the next morning the cashier at the parking station demanded payment of $250 in addition to the normal parking fee. He refused to pay the $250.Becky is threatening to sue Friedrich for $250.
Con is threatening to sue Becky for the value of his car, and Debbie is threatening to sue Becky for compensation for her injuries caused by Tom.
You are required to:
Advise:
1. Con

2. Debbie, and

3. Friedrich

of each of their possible legal rights or liabilities. For each party, 4 marks allocated to the discussion of the advice given.
Refer to relevant legal authority in support of your answer.

find the cost of your paper
Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.