The conservatism principle involves “recognizing expenses and liabilities as soon as possible when there is uncertainty about the outcome, but to only recognize revenues and assets when they are assured of being received” (The conservatism principle). Requirement 2 – B Hudson’s wholesale inventories should be reported on the balance sheet at the replacement cost amount. The text indicates that the replacement cost is less than the NRV (or ceiling) and more than the NRV-NP (or floor) making the
Factors for consideration a. law’s non-logical implications in interpretation what parties would’ve agreed to (ex. Haines: duration and scope of contract) - policy: at-will doctrine in employment: policy - would’ve agreed to terms had they anticipated situation - had in mind, but didn’t express it b. context - what is the objective of the contract? Is it ambiguous? Ex. Spaulding v. Morse (369): stop yearly payment to trust during time in armed services - enforce according to terms if unambiguous, consider context if terms are ambiguous - not only context at time of contract formation, but also what happened AFTER ⇨ changed circumstances - why look at context?
Under the Uniform Commercial Code, or UCC (see Chapter 18), a bid at an auction constitutes an offer. The offer (the highest bid) is accepted when the auctioneer’s hammer falls. The UCC also states that auctions are “with reserve” unless the seller specifies otherwise. As noted elsewhere, in an auction with reserve, the seller reserves the right not to sell the goods to the highest bidder. Hence, even after the hammer falls, the contract for sale remains conditioned on the seller’s approval.
Pat could argue that signing the Notice of Unsatisfactory Performance/Corrective Action Plan as an implied contract protecting his employment with NewCorp. Critical information in this case needs to be further reviewed to assess the risks and rights of both parties in this scenario. For instance, was there any form of documented performance discussion regarding Pat’s performance? If so, was Pat given the opportunity to correct his performance issue? Or, in the initial employment arrangement, was there promise of employment for any period of time?
The third term for a quasi-contract to be in effect is that the plaintiff reasonably expected to be paid for the benefit, with the defendant knowing this. This last element must also be present for the court to award quantum meruit to the Chesneys. Where to draw line, though? How do we know that a
Case 1: Revenue Recognition According to ASC 605-50-25, Revenue recognition - customer payments and incentives “Costs that are directly related to the acquisition of a contract and that would have not been incurred but for the acquisition of that contract (incremental direct acquisition costs) shall be deferred and charged to expense in proportion to the revenue recognized. When is revenue considered to have been earned/realized/realizable in recognition? Revenue is considered earned when a good or service is either delivered or preformed and inflow is received (cash, receivable, etc.). It is is realized when a product is exchanged for cash or claims to cash (something must change hands). There are four main conditions for revenue
Discuss the criticisms that have been made of any two general defences and consider what proposals have been made for reform of the law. The general defences have evolved over the years mainly through judicial decisions, with which some have received criticism. The defence of insanity has received several criticisms; the first is that rules are not based on medical definitions and the terms used do not relate to medical conditions. Also the rules were created by judges in 1843 and despite huge developments in the understanding, diagnosis and treating of psychiatric illnesses the M’Naughty rules remain unchanged. In 1953, the royal commission on capital punishment described these rules as “obsolete and misleading” and the requirements for “disease of the mind “as “outdated and inaccurate” In the cases of Sullivan, Burgess and Hennessey it appears that this defence is too wide covering epilepsy, sleep walking and diabetes, which most people would not regard as mental illnesses.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY This is an appeal brought before the United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit by Metric Constructors Inc. as a result of the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals decision to uphold the monetary deduction of $132,570.00 from the contract. ISSUES The issue is the role of trade practices and customs as used in contract interpretation. HOLDINGS Yes, trade practices and customs can be used in the interpretation of contract wordings. The Court found the contract specifications were ambiguous and it was susceptible to more than one reasonable interpretation.
What constitutes sufficient consideration, however, has been the subject of continuing legal debate. Contracts and courts generally use the term valuable consideration to signify consideration sufficient to sustain an enforceable agreement. In general, consideration consists of a promise to perform a desired act or a promise to refrain from doing an act that one is legally entitled to do. Thus, a person who seeks to enforce a promise must have paid or obligated herself to pay money, delivered goods, expended time and labour, or forgone some other profitable activity or legal right. For example, in a contract for the sale of goods the money paid is the valuable consideration
THE DOCTRINE OF PRIVITY OF A CONTRACT INTRODUCTION THE doctrine of privity of contract is related to issues of the creation of contractual obligations, concerning with the question of who has rights and liabilities under a contract. It is sometimes argued that some aspects of the doctrine are just another way of stating the rule that consideration must move from the promise. Two principal questions to be considered; May a person who is not a party to a contract acquire rights under it? Can a contract impose duties on a person who is not a party to it? The first part of the doctrine relates to the conferring of benefits, was the subject of major reform in the Contracts(Rights of 3rd parties)Act 1999.This Act was based on the recommendations of the Law Commission Report No.242,Privity of Contract: Contracts for the Benefit of Third Parties(Cmnd 3329),and applies to contracts made on or after 11 May 2000.although the old law may still be applicable to some contracts, most questions on privity will now require you to show an understanding of the new legislation, also asked however whether the reform is satisfactory, and this will also require knowledge of the previous law.