icon

Usetutoringspotscode to get 8% OFF on your first order!

law of contract

 

The law of contract demonstrates that the courts cling to an outdated vision of the market, which privileges  certainty, form and finality over relationships and fair dealing.

You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Leave a Reply

law of contract

law of contract

Paper details:
Law of Contract Law Exam 14th July 2015 Pre seen case study Gerry, a frequent customer at Q&B DIY superstore, has just re-laid his dining room floor, and purchases two large tins of floor varnish. When paying for the varnish, he fails to see a notice at the cash desk, which states, “Q&B undertake no liability for death, injury or other losses resulting from the use of products purchased”. Gerry uses the varnish but, because of a manufacturing defect, when it dries the surface of the floorboards remains sticky. Gerry is obliged to pay £250 to have the floorboards sanded and revarnished. He cannot undertake this work himself because the defects in the varnish caused it to give off mildly toxic fumes, which resulted in him suffering breathing difficulties for several weeks. Q&B admit breach of contract in relation to the sale of the varnish, but seek to rely on the exclusion notice at the cash desk to relieve them of liability. Advise Gerry of his contractual rights against Q&B and the validity of the exclusion clause.

Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.

Comments are closed.

law of contract

law of contract

Paper details:
Law of Contract Law Exam 14th July 2015 Pre seen case study Gerry, a frequent customer at Q&B DIY superstore, has just re-laid his dining room floor, and purchases two large tins of floor varnish. When paying for the varnish, he fails to see a notice at the cash desk, which states, “Q&B undertake no liability for death, injury or other losses resulting from the use of products purchased”. Gerry uses the varnish but, because of a manufacturing defect, when it dries the surface of the floorboards remains sticky. Gerry is obliged to pay £250 to have the floorboards sanded and revarnished. He cannot undertake this work himself because the defects in the varnish caused it to give off mildly toxic fumes, which resulted in him suffering breathing difficulties for several weeks. Q&B admit breach of contract in relation to the sale of the varnish, but seek to rely on the exclusion notice at the cash desk to relieve them of liability. Advise Gerry of his contractual rights against Q&B and the validity of the exclusion clause.

Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.

Comments are closed.

Powered by WordPress | Designed by: Premium WordPress Themes | Thanks to Themes Gallery, Bromoney and Wordpress Themes