Office Pro X9 Is An Amazing Chair Is A Term Of Contract - 1375 Words

Office Pro X9 Is An Amazing Chair Is A Term Of Contract (Case Study Sample) Content: Common Law AssignmentName:Course:Question oneLegal issueThe issue here is to determine whether the wordsOFFICE PRO X9 is an amazing chair is a term of contractRule of LawA term of contract is any provisions forming part of a contract. The terms that exist in a contract form the legality of any contract and are used when enforcing such contracts. Different statements exist in contract situations like puffs, representation and terms. According to Douglas (2002) terms lead to contractual agreements if their truth can be guaranteed by the person who made the statement. On the other hand, representations are statements of facts that do not amount to any contract since the person making the statement does not guarantee any truth. Statements can be determined based on timing, content, knowledge and knowledge.[Douglas, D. 2002. "Contract Rights and Civil Rights." Michigan Law Review] ApplicationThe words by Samantha are not terms of the contract but rather statements of rep resentation that explained the benefits that the client may derive from the chair. However, the content of the statement does not form a term of contract since the words I think were used which means a representation which may be wrong or right.ConclusionThe terms used in the process are not contractual terms but rather statements that were used by one of the agents in the contract. These representation were part of the marketing strategy to make Peter purchase the chair.Question twoLegal IssueThe issue here is to determine whether the ability of Office Pro X9 to provide sufficient lower-back support to allow peter work comfortably is a term of contract or not.Rule of LawContracts are agreements between different parties based on specific terms. Considerations are used to determine the benefits that every party in contract gets. This is normally a promise of value that the promisor gives in exchange of something valuable CITATION Bei02 \l 1033 (Beillia 2002). The law of contract re cognizes conditions and warranty that form the basis of any contract that is established between parties (McKendrick 2005). These form part of the terms that bind a contract since they define the level of involvement. The design of the chair is to ensure that it operates in certain conditions like in the case of Peter. This means that if the conditions that were set in the initial agreement are not met, then the contract has been breached and the aggrieved party can sue for damages. Courts approach consideration elements of a contract through determining the sufficiency to meet the test of law.[Beillia, Anthony J. 2002. "Promises, Trust and Contract Law." Scholarly Works, 26-40.] [McKendrick, Ewan. 2005. Contract Law - Text, Cases and Materials. Oxford University Press .] ApplicationConsiderations form the basis of any contract since they amount to the price that every party pays to bind the contract. The price of the chair is based on the design and the elements that a customer ben efits from. On the other hand, a customer buys the chair based on the specifications that will offer desired benefits. This consideration becomes the basis of the contract the two parties enter into. In Australia the bargain theory of consideration is mostly used if the promise of one party forms the consideration of the other. In Currie v Misa (1875) the court ruled that the bank was entitled to recover its amount in the contract since one party had breached the contract. Peter bought the chair based on the promise that it will offer certain benefits that related to his health. On the other hand, he paid the price of promise as a consideration to enjoy the benefits associated with the promise.[Currie v Misa . 1875. LR 10 Ex 153] ConclusionThe ability of the office chair form the contract that Peter entered in, the chair was designed to meet certain specifications that could benefit Peter as stated in its manual. This means that the promise in the contract is the design and ability of the chair to offer back support to Peter. Since Peter specified the conditions under which he can enter a contract and the seller agreed, the terms form a contract.Question threeLegal issueThe issue here is to establish the type of term of contract that the OFFICE PRO X9 ability to provide sufficient lower-back support to allow Peter to work comfortably the whole day is?Rule of lawTerms used in contract law are classified according to their importance to the contract. These terms are conditions, warranty and innominate. Conditions are terms that form the root of every contract and if they are breached, then the contract can be terminated by the other party without any legal obligations (Primack 2009). A warranty is a guarantee or a promise that is made by one party to the other party who pays the consideration. It is an element of a contract since it sets preconditions that need to be fulfilled by one party (Willmott, et al. 2009). Breach of the conditions or warranty of contract can lead to claim for damages to the aggrieved party. In determining whether it is a warranty or a condition, the terms and samples used in the contract will determine. Innominate terms focus on understanding the effect of breaching a contract as seen Hong Kong Fir Shipping v Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha (1962) where the court used an innominate term by looking at the effect of the breach to an innocent party.[Primack, M. ,A. 2009. "Representations, Warranties and Covenants: Back to the Basics in Contracts." National Law Review.] [Willmott, L., S. Christensen, D. Butler, and B Dixon. 2009. Contract Law. North Melbourne: Oxford University Press.] [Hong Kong Fir Shipping v Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha. 1962. 2 QB 26] ApplicationThe contract that Peter entered into was based on the basis of the chair to meet the preconditions established by both parties. Peter was satisfied by the explanations over the ability of the chair to hold his back while Samantha was focusing on the payment that Peter will make for the chair. In Poussard v Spiers (1876) the court held that Pousard had breached the initial conditions of the contract since she missed the important part of the contract. Peter purchased the chair in order to control his back while working. This means that the conditions for the contract were the chair was to support his back all day and in any case the chair did not work as per the conditions, then there will be breach of contract.[Poussard v Spiers. 1876. 1 QBD 410] Concl...