LAW201A Case Study In The Area Of Contract Law Homework Answer

pages Pages: 4word Words: 890

Question :

Subject TitleBusiness Law for Managers
Subject CodeLAW201A
Assessment TitleCase Study
Graduate Capabilities
  1. Professional Expertise
  2. Innovation Problem Solving
Learning Outcome/s (found in the Subject Outline)
  1. Appraise the impact of the current legal system on a wide range of business sectors.
  2. Analyse the ethical implications of legal decisions.
  3. Examine the obligations, rights and remedies available to parties in business relationships.
Assessment type (group or individual)Individual
Weighting %35%
Word count1300 +/- 10%
Assessment instructionsThe purpose of this assessment is to undertake a case study in the area
of contract law.Read the case of Carlill v Carbolic Smokeball Company [1893] 1 QB 256 and answer the following questions:
  1. Summarise the facts of the case Carlill v Carbolic Smokeball Company [1893] 1 QB 256
  2. Summarise the arguments of the plaintiff.
  3. Summarise the arguments of the defendant.
  4. Was their any ethical implications of the defendant’s conduct?
  5. What was the decision of the Court?
  6. Summarise why contract law is important in your particular industry and whose interests and rights it protects providing 1 industry example,
This is an individual assessment. The report should be 1300 words +/- 10%.

Show More

Answer :

case study

Overview of assignment 

The underwritten legal manual is based on the legend and universal case Carlill v Carbolic Smokeball Company [1893] 1 QB 256 paying attention towards offer and acceptance of Contract Law. Here, we will be acknowledging the facts of cases through understanding the interpretation of legal case. we will conclude the project through dividing it into parts where firstly the facts of the case will be summarized, in brief we will acknowledge the arguments raised by plaintiff and defendant, defendant’s ethical implications relevant to the case and court decision. The case law has importance in the business industry, this matter is also reflected under the manual. We will acknowledge the case law in IRAC format. This case implies on the whether the company giving advertisement is offer or barely an invitation. What implications does the industry have owing to the case law.

1. Facts of the case law

The case law signifies the implication of open offer/ general offer given by Carbolic Smokeball company through advertisement that coampny produces pill having ability to remove the chance to get affected by influenza if the procedure given by coampny is being followed. The company also advertise about person in case caught influenza even following the producer to intake pill will be compensated by company with £100. The coampny owing to advertisement deposited as provision £1000 in the bank account. While the claimant to case, Mrs. Carlill adherently affected by the influenza even after following the procedure stated by company to intake the pills. Thus, claim for £100 (Durovic, & Janssen, 2018). The defendant company refuse to pay the compensated amount as referred in the advertisement stating that it was just a statement not an offer and does not bind company to pay anyone with referred amount. The coampny also stated that the consideration was not involved and hence, it cannot be termed that company offered public at large to give out money instead was barely an invitation to the sell product. The legal case became the core structure of Unilateral contracts.

2. Arguments by plaintiff

  • The plaintiff sued the defended coampny for refusing to pay Plaintiff the reward of £100 arguing on that the offer given by coampny was general offer being clear and valid offer.
  • The offer was general with valid intention and performing the task as stated in advertisement is consideration which cannot be informed through notice of acceptance. Merely buying the product and utilizing as stated procedure is communication.
  • The plaintiff intention to purchase the product with good intentions and for benefits as the coampny advertise to give through product consumption.

3. Arguments of Defendants

  • The company stated the advertisement as vague having unreasonable limitation of time bound notice.
  • The company argued that advertisement being uncertain as the consumer procedure to use the product as described is not measurable and cannot be figured out (Sakyi, Mweshi, Musona, & Tayali, 2020).
  • The plaintiff stated that the consideration is not valid as there is no mean to figure out that plaintiff has brought the product on his own or stolen it.
  • The offer acceptance is must for valid contract. However, the company argued that performing a task in private without notice of performance is invalid. The company stated that offer being cannot be communicated is not valid offer.
  • The contract offered is wagering contract. this is specifically unlawful and invalid under the eyes of law.

4. Ethical Implications of Defendant’s conduct

The ethical implication on the given case stated out to acknowledge unilateral contracts. The unilateral contract is found to be performed when the general offers is undertaken through following the steps as per advertisement or publication and this advertisement be considered as valid communication. The consideration can be the result or outcome the public receive against the offered offer. The promises being based on valid consideration are validly enforceable. The contract in commercial industry is not invalid and exist in market owing to its importance in commercial industry.

The English common contract law recognizes the case as legend case in developing the principle of unilateral contracts. The contract figures out the importance of unilateral contract in the commercial industry. The legal case is one where essential of contracts are not present still fulfills the condition of valid contract. The privity of contracts concept affects the commercial activity of business and hence, after the case held the company recognize that it is important to adopt the business documents very carefully to not create a situation of litigation for the company (Stein, & Thiel, 2017). The case law has significance importance after the carbolic case. The rights of public are served through reducing the chance used by company to use fake advertisement to increase the sale of company. Thus, with due time importance of the case to reduce chance of puff statements used by commercial industries to increase the sale reduced.

5. Court’s Decision

The Justice Lindley, profound that offer published by company is express promise. This means that the company specifically to prove the offer valid stated that company has already deposited 1000 pounds in bank as provision to provide reward for reciprocal effects of the product.

The judge further stated that the offer is unilateral offer stating does not require any specific notification of performance of act. Merely buying product and following procedure as described is an offer.

The advertisement wordings published are certain and not vague. The words are legally valid to give intention of constructive promise. The terms offered in adversity is merely true to make readers believe the promise published in advertisement (Lincoln, & Andrew, 2019).

The performance of procedure published by company in advertisement is the offered acceptance. The specific conditions lead in advertisement is acceptance to offer, no further notice of acceptance of offer is required.

The consideration involved in the case can be categorized in two forms where the company receiving the value of sale of product is a sale and the inconvenience caused to plaintiff. The specific consideration followed as description is valid consideration.

6. Impact incurred in commercial industry owing to the case law

The unilateral law is ascertained to be an offer statement that the business used to offer a wide range of public offering to promise to do as per the offer if specified circumstances occur. The offer in case of unilateral contract is one sided. These are general refereed as open offer covering wide range of group of people. This is the case where only one-party offering will have obligation and liability to perform as stated irrespective of bilateral contract having two party’s obligation need to consider valid contract. The given rule was developed after the carbolic company case. Earlier the bilateral contract was recognized under the eyes of law. The companies have become more careful towards advertising owing to the unilateral contract recognition (Sakyi, Mweshi, Musona, & Tayali, 2020).

The unilateral contract in the business industry can be understood with the examples like, an insurance policies advertisement has a caution note specifying policies and mutual funds are associated with risk (Ooi, 2018). The people before investing are taking personal risk. The mutual fund companies offer the advertisement in general to large people of group. To reduce the chance of any other legal issue the company specifically attach caution notice for investors stating that company will not be responsible for any loss. The unilateral contract in general cases where any person advertising for loss of dog. Where publishing that any person fining the dog will be rewards with money. Here, the owner must give money if finder gets the dog in return. The commercial companies to reduce the uncertainty in the business should take care of words and language used by companies as the advertisement is directly associated to recognize as legal document of offer. The specified condition is responsible for the performance of contract.