|
Title: Is anyone good at law? Post by: Rossi on Wednesday, January 18, 2006, 22:40:21 I've got a piece of coursework in for Friday and I really don't know where to start. We've been given a piece of text and have to pick out the issues from it then find cases to refer it to then say who would be most likely to win the case. e.g
Quote Ronnie owns a shop called Purple Daze that only sells items coloured purple. One day Tom enters the store after seeing a purple lamp and lampshade in the shop window. He wishes to purchase the items, but Ronnie refuses as it is the last one in the shop and has been reserved by Dick. I've had a look around on the internet for similar cases but I'm not really too sure what search terms I should be using. Any tips? Title: Is anyone good at law? Post by: flammableBen on Wednesday, January 18, 2006, 22:44:30 One of my ex-housemates has a law degree. She's normally on msn at some point quite late, I'll ask her if she does turn up.
Title: Is anyone good at law? Post by: Rossi on Wednesday, January 18, 2006, 22:45:18 cheers mate!
Title: Is anyone good at law? Post by: Simon Pieman on Wednesday, January 18, 2006, 22:58:01 Sounds familiar from what I did in law. Give me a tick and I will find the case....it's to do with offers and acceptance.
Title: Is anyone good at law? Post by: Simon Pieman on Wednesday, January 18, 2006, 23:13:08 OK here goes....
A very clear issue is that Ronnie has refused to sell the goods to Tom. He is perfectly entitled to do so because the display of goods in a shop window is an 'invitation to treat' and not a contractual offer. This is very well highlighted by the case of Fisher v Bell [1961] where Lord Parker stated: "it is perfectly clear that according to the ordinary law of contract the display of an article with a price on it in a shop window is merley an invitation to treat. It is in no sense an offer for the sale, the acceptance of which constitutes a contract". Note - the law is the same if the article has no price on it. Also take note of Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) Ltd (1953, CA) where display of articles on shelf was an invitation to treat - not an offer. The offer is made by the customer taking the goods to the till. Hope that gives you a good start and if I think of some other stuff will let you know. Title: Is anyone good at law? Post by: Rossi on Wednesday, January 18, 2006, 23:16:00 Thats brilliant Si, cheers.
Title: Is anyone good at law? Post by: Simon Pieman on Wednesday, January 18, 2006, 23:16:04 You may want to look at the issue of contractual agreements as well. Ronnie probably has a contractual agreement to keep the item reserved for a period of time for Dick. This also links to the issue of revocation of contract.
Title: Is anyone good at law? Post by: Simon Pieman on Wednesday, January 18, 2006, 23:50:18 Ok just refreshing my memory a bit. The whole reservation thing:
Ronnie may revoke the contract (if there is one) to reserve the items for Dick at any time he likes, as long as it is before acceptance. However if there is consideration (which means the exchange of a promise for another i.e. money for the items) the revocation must be communicated by Ronnie to Dick. There is no way of knowing whether the agreement to keep the items reserved involves any consideration so you need to attack from both angles i.e. make an argument for if there is consideration and if there isn't. Use the case of Dickinson v Dodds (1876) for guidance and also Stevenson v McLean (1880) Then there is the method of acceptance. If Dick decides he wants the items there are many methods to do so. I will have a gander now to dig up relevant points with regards to this and post in a bit. Title: Is anyone good at law? Post by: yeo on Wednesday, January 18, 2006, 23:51:24 No thats wrong.
Title: Is anyone good at law? Post by: Simon Pieman on Thursday, January 19, 2006, 00:01:45 Quote from: "simon pieman" Yeovil may revoke his dick (if there is one) from his arse any time he likes, as long as it is before midnight. However if there is constipation (which means he can't shit because his cock is too far up himself) the revocation must be forced by Ronnie to remove the Dick. There is no way of knowing whether Yeovil Red will have time to remove his penis from his arse so he may need to attack from both angles i.e. eat lots of beans and fart it out or pull it out using a pair of tongs. Use the case of Yeovil Red v His Bum Hole (2005) for guidance and maybe a surgeon's knife. :o Title: Is anyone good at law? Post by: Rossi on Thursday, January 19, 2006, 00:04:13 :soapy tit wank:
Title: Is anyone good at law? Post by: yeo on Thursday, January 19, 2006, 00:06:59 you cant talk to me like that i have 6000 odd posts :x
Title: Is anyone good at law? Post by: Simon Pieman on Thursday, January 19, 2006, 00:23:31 That was my 6666th post though :twisted:
Title: Is anyone good at law? Post by: Simon Pieman on Thursday, January 19, 2006, 01:04:14 Acceptance of a contract:
Silence does not amount to acceptance. Therefore if Dick does not communicate his acceptance by speech or by written etc. then he cannot say later (when the offer has expired) that he had in fact accepted the offer before. This is shown in the case of Felthouse v Bindley (1862). If acceptance is given by word of mouth then that alone is not enough to amount to acceptance. The acceptance must be heard by the offeror. The reason for this is that the parties cannot be regarded as having made an agreement unless they are aware of it. Lord Denning gave examples in Entores Ltd v Miles Far East Corporation (1955, CA). For instance a loud noise means an offer or acceptance cannot be heard. Or if a telephone line is bad and the other person can't hear. Title: Is anyone good at law? Post by: Simon Pieman on Thursday, January 19, 2006, 01:08:43 Acceptance by post:
Acceptance takes place when it is posted and not when it is received (known as the postal rule) Adams v Lindsell (1818) even when delayed in post or lost Household Fire Insurance Co v Grant (1879, CA) there's a ton of other stuff but I can't be arsed any more Title: Is anyone good at law? Post by: flammableBen on Thursday, January 19, 2006, 01:16:16 Looks like it's been sorted
Title: Is anyone good at law? Post by: Rossi on Thursday, January 19, 2006, 16:35:57 Cheers for that SiPie helped a lot. I'm onto the last part now. Where do you find your cases from and how do you know what to search for? I've spent ages looking for relevent cases but come up with nothing
Title: Is anyone good at law? Post by: Simon Pieman on Thursday, January 19, 2006, 16:57:35 Get a Law for Business book or 'Davies on Contract'
I had these texts from last year. Doesn't the course have any lecture notes on it which can point you to relevant cases? And are the other parts of the essay similar? If you have no notes and the other parts are similar I could email the notes I had from last year as I can get these online I think. If you have an ATHENS membership (through your uni or something) you can go onto lexis-nexis which has all of the cases there. Title: Is anyone good at law? Post by: Rossi on Thursday, January 19, 2006, 17:06:21 I struggle to stay awake in the Law lectures tbh because the lecturer is crap. I can get onto the Westlaw site via the uni website, but I can't find any cases that are a relevent. The last part is:
Quote a salesman for Ibcon plc turns up at his store and offers to sell him a new range of kitchenware. Ronnie looks through the brochure the salesman supplies, and notices a very nice kettle. The brochure says the kettle comes only in black, red or yellow. Ronnie asks the salesman if they sell any in purple. The salesman replies, “We have just added that colour to our range.” Pleased with this, Ronnie orders twelve of these kettles in purple, believing that their unusual design will result in him being able to charge a premium price. Ronnie is, however, disappointed when the kettles arrive, for they are coloured yellow not purple. Ronnie immediately gets on the phone to Ibcon complaining. The company complaints adviser tells Ronnie that he is unable to return the goods as included in the catalogue is a statement which reads, “Ibcon only agrees to supply the goods in this catalogue, and only gives an undertaking that the goods are of the specifications mentioned in the catalogue. Ibcon accepts no responsibility for any statements made by agents or servants of the company which differ from the information in this catalogue.” The complaints adviser also claims that the company has never manufactured any purple products. If you could recomend a couple of cases that would be great I owe you a pint or 2 if I ever meet you Title: Is anyone good at law? Post by: Simon Pieman on Thursday, January 19, 2006, 17:12:47 Right ok this again is to do with contracts but mainly the Sale of Goods Act and express and implied terms.
Will upload notes in a mo Title: Is anyone good at law? Post by: Simon Pieman on Thursday, January 19, 2006, 17:15:39 http://s61.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=09K9O196DAW6S3BOE41VOJEE1A
Pages 16-19 are the relevant ones I think Title: Is anyone good at law? Post by: Rossi on Thursday, January 19, 2006, 17:24:24 Legend!
|