Contract Termination and Breach of Warranty: A Case Study, Study Guides, Projects, Research of Law

Download Contract Termination and Breach of Warranty: A Case Study and more Study Guides, Projects, Research Law in PDF only on Docsity! LAW OF COMMRCE LAW20019 THUSHAN RODRIGO 101774898 Introduction The purpose of terminating a contract is to discharge the parties from any unfulfilled duties. Termination has no bearing on the parties' obligations for violations of the agreement that took place before the contract was terminated. Additionally, even though any further obligations to perform under the terms of the contract have been terminated, the parties may still pursue damages claims under the common law and in accordance with any termination clauses that may be included in the contract (Wan, 2021) A breach of contract is defined broadly as a failure or unwillingness by one or both of the parties to execute one or all of the duties imposed on them by the contract. A breach of contract can also occur when one of the terms is completed but not to the proper standard established by the contract. In this problem Alvin and Belle’s contract is important and the person who signed them to terminate the Alvin and Belle’s contract. Alvin should provide evidence for violation of the contract and damages and violation that Alvin has done by showing the relevant facts more sufficiently. Alvin should take care of all the problems by terminating the contract. (L Estrage V Graucoh 1934) Identification of issues The following are the major concerns that must be addressed in encounter for the Alvin and Belle: Belle recommended Supermax range pinball machines to fulfill the requirement of the tournament conduct by Alvin when Alvin clearly elaborate the nature of the tournament and the framework of the process which organized for the purpose of promoting the business. Moreover the issue arises when the pin ball machines occurred with failures for continues function. According to the clause 06 of the contract, Alvin is responsible to inform the defects of the machines and the tournament is held during the weekends but Belle is only liable to replace the machines within two working days. Therefore it will be a disadvantage to Alvin. Even though Clause 04 of the contract of states ‘all terms of the contract are included herein. It is hereby acknowledged that all express or implied term or statements are hereby excluded unless specifically included in this Agreement’. There are lapses of not comprising the clauses for the events of breaching the contract. It is irrelevant that there was no intent to defraud or damage the person to whom the misrepresentation was made. In this case, the defendants were not misleading (Derry v Peek 1889). If Belle proved that she delivered a careless statement, but Belle truly believed the meaning to be true, accordance with the perspective of terminating the contract, Alvin have to prove the significance of the statement provoked to get the decision to bound to the contract to the rent machinery. A breach of contract is the last method for contractual obligations to end. To acquire a complete knowledge of this procedure, we will first investigate what constitutes a breach of contract. According to Poussard v Spiers (1875) the question was whether failing to appear on the first day of performance constituted a breach of a contract requirement. Inability to supply the equipment on time as agreed by Belle, and no action was taken against at the time for the failure thus caused. However, the damage to the accused persons and the resulting lack of consideration is exactly as severe as if it had been caused by Belle's negligence. The conclusion of the case is the suggestion of claiming the compensation under breach of contract by performance and Alvin need to elaborate to oral state how affect for his decision making. There may be a circumstance in which one party has completed their contractual responsibilities and only one party's obligations remain. A typical agreement to discharge obligations will not be legitimate or binding in these situations. As with any other type of binding legal agreement, valid compensation is required to make a binding agreement to discharge obligations under a contract - Hannah Blumenthal [1983] 1 AC 854. The 'Mutual release exception' is an exemption to the usual norms of consideration in respect to discharge agreements. The mutual release exemption states that mutual abandonment of responsibilities under a separate contract is valid compensation in a discharge agreement. A binding release must be entered into by the parties through a deed (Paal Wilson & Co A/S v Hannah Blumenthal 1983). Bibliography Bettini v. Gye, 1 Q.B. Div. 183 (1876). Derry v. Peek, 14 App. 337 (1889). Mackay v. Dick, 1881 A.C.6 251, 1881 App. 6 251 (1881). Paal Wilson & Co A/S v. Partenreederei Hannah Blumenthal, 1 All E.R. 34 (1983). Poussard v. Spiers, 1 Q.B. Div. 410 (1876). Pym v. Campbell, 6 E. & B. 370 (1856). Van Den Esschert v. Chappell, 1960 W.A.R. 114 (1960). Wan, 2021: , (Wan, 2021),