Yes because the parties were in communication by email, and since the company wanting to distribute the new game for Chou sent the email with all the details of the contract it showed they were still interested and put it in writing the terms of the contract. 4. What role does the statute of frauds play in this contract? The statute of frauds is a law that governs contracts. It states that contracts must be in writing to be enforceable.
Use an indirect pattern to organize your letter; this is, after all, bad news that the reader won’t want to hear. Review Chapter 17 for additional information on writing successful business letters. A successful Refuse Claim Letter will: · Conform to business letter format, including addresses for writer and reader, correct date format, correct line spacing, and correct margin justification. · Organize its content into logical paragraphs using an indirect pattern. · Display professional and appropriate tone (firm but kind).
According to both parties, time limits have been extended in the past without incident. What is not clear is whether or not this particular incident has occurred in the past. The chief steward submitted a handwritten note requesting an extension when the terms of the contract clearly state that the request must be submitted via certified mail, postmarked within 10 days of the third response. 2. Should the arbitrator be influenced by any evidence over the reasons for the termination of those two employees?
If these two components can be proven, then there is a wrongful termination case because Newcorp breaches the contract. However, Pat has to take the proper step to verify these two facts by doing the following: Pat must write a letter to Newcorp requesting a written reason to why he is being let go. Pat must keep in mind that he is being laid off, not fired, because he is being offered severance pay, meaning there may not be fault on his side or performance. If Newcorp responses and confirm that Pat is being let go because of his performance then Pat may have a case
Email is considered a written form of communication, since the negotiation suggestions are written. The communications were done via email, they were also done in person, verbally, and the final agreement was sent in via fax, therefore communication via email, is simply just communication. The only question that arises is if BTT had received the final copy of the agreement from Chou, and if so why was a response not reciprocated. (4) What role does the statute of frauds play in this contract? The statute of frauds plays a detrimental role in this case, as it determines whether a contract was established between both
Armstrong is obligated to transfer and deliver conforming goods to GCI. Conforming goods requires that the goods must conform exactly to the agreed upon description provided by the buyer to the seller. This action is referred to as tender of delivery and the UCC obligates the seller to have or tender the specific goods requested. By substituting the third part of the press Armstrong has not yet breached the contract but has not provided perfect tender. Armstrong’s failures to meet their obligation gives GCI three options: they may reject the entire shipment of goods, accept the shipment of goods as is, or accept any number of commercial units and reject the rest of the goods, (Melvin 2011, pg.
In addition contract law defines certain circumstances that may excuse one or both parties from performing their obligation in the agreement. In the scenario Big Time Toymaker both parties never initiated a blinding distribution contract even though both parties had an oral distribution agreement, three days before the 90-day deadline. It is clearly stated in the original negotiating contract no distribution agreement will be engaged unless the contract is in writing. After both parties had a meeting, Chou was in the process in drafting the distribution contract which formalized their final agreement. Before he could finish draft, BTT managers send out an e-mail with the subject “Strat Deal” projecting the outline of the key points of the distribution agreement focusing on time frames, price and obligations of both parties.
The statute of frauds is the law overseeing which agreements must be in writing in order to be enforceable. With that said the statute of frauds my work in favor of Chou because there was an agreement sent up within the e-mail. The issue with the e-mail is that there is now signature from any of the parties so a court may reject this because of the lack of signatures from the parties. It is possible that the court system may allow BTT to claim that the agreement is a mistake because there was a management change and the new manager may have felt that the agreement was not in the best interest of the company. I think the best defense for BTT would be that there is no contract because either parties did not sign anything, just that they were in talks of a possible contract.
Assignment 2 Part 1 - Making Assessment decisions Explain how to judge whether evidence is: • Authentic All evidence must be judged for authenticity if there is doubt then the evidence must be explained and substantiated. Individual pieces of evidence can be authenticated through signatures of declaration and also through witness testimonies. Candidates must also sign a declaration when submitting a completed portfolio which confirms that the evidence they are providing is authentic. There are many types of ways which are ‘fool proof’ to ensure that assessment will be authentic such as professional discussions, question and answer and simulated activities/role-plays. In regards to written evidence then a decision must be made whether
Trespass to the Person History The Royal Writ of Trespass had two formal requirements: 1) That the defendant acted vi et armis translated as with force and arms 2) That the defendant acted contra pacem translated as against the Kings Peace. In order to enjoy the benefit of a trial in the Royal court (a better mode of trial and procedure), claimants would often claim that the second requirement had been fulfilled even where it had not as a mater of course. This meant that when the claim came to court and the court could see that it had not, the courts would have to decide the merits of the claim “on the case.” This led to a new form of action “trespass on the case” which did not require the strict requirements of the writ of trespass. “Trespass on the case” however, was not actionable per se and required proof of damage flowing from the interference with the plaintiff. Intentional/Negligent + Direct = Writ of Trespass (actionable per se) Unintentional/Negligent + Non Direct = On the case (requires proof of damage) Unintentional + Non Negligent = A plea of Inevitable Accident as a defence Trespass distinguished from Negligence Trespass is a STRICT LIABILITY tort.