Facts against: In the original negotiation agreement it was stipulated that no distribution contract existed unless it was in writing. Another possible fact that could weigh against Chou is that although the agreement was drafted it was not sent because if the misinterpretation that the email was in fact the contract. Question 3: Does the fact that the parties were communicating by e-mail have any impact on your analysis in Questions 1 and 2 (above)? Communication via email does have some impact to the question of contract but it is not enough to rule out a contract completely. The use of email may be binding if it does not state that the intent is to only negotiate terms.
It must include the fundamental terms of the agreement with the intention that no further negotiations are to take place. An invitation to treat is different to an offer as it only invites the party to make an offer and it is not intended to be binding. ix) In contract law consideration is required as an inducement to enter into a contract that is enforceable in the courts. It is an essential element for the formation of a contract. What constitutes sufficient consideration, however, has been the subject of continuing legal debate.
This agreement is the contract which governs what is considered acceptable. There is no mention of being promoted in his current position as an option in the written agreement – only as a remedy request from the union. Management could redefine the pay scale and job definition of Mr. Mitchell’s current position; however, it would need to be when he vacates the job and need applicants and being sought. Therefore, Mr. Mitchell should not receive a promotion and receive back pay while in his current position. If the potential loophole for management to make intentional “errors” is a union concern, then the union should seek contract language changes to remedy it.
Two months later, the union submitted a formal letter to the company stating the company’s response to the handwritten request was unsatisfactory and the union would proceed with arbitration. The company argues that the union did not go through the agreed upon appropriate channels for communication of requests and the claim in invalid; the union argues that they are still entitled to file for arbitration despite not following the agreed upon and binding rules for requesting arbitration. 1. Assess the argument that the parties in the past have agreed to extend time limits. According to both parties, time limits have been extended in the past without incident.
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.
Jones purchase the stock of Smithon outright leaving Smithon intact? The stock should not be purchase by Mr. Jones. Mr. Jones acquiring the assets, liabilities and also would inherit the contractual obligations of the selling corporation, would, be the results of the purchase. In lay terms, he has bought the existing Smithon Corporation and he is responsible of ensuring daily operations run efficiently but the tax aspect of acquisition he is responsible for existing and any future tax liabilities that the selling corporation had. It would be my advice for Mr. Jones to not buy the stock because of the liability of current and future tax obligations which Mr. Jones would incur from the purchase of the stock.
Here, it would be affirming that there was a binding contract, but insisting that the obligation of Proudfoot had not been performed. This would make Proudfoot liable for damages. If the nonperformance were deemed to “erase” the element of consideration, Proudfoot could say that there never was a contract because of the failure, and therefore, no damages could be recovered for the breach of a contract that did not
If there was a contract signed between these two, then Bob could enforce that the original terms of the contract be kept. However, the acceptance of the offer without a signed contract allows for the method of payment to change. Had the price decided to be changed, then that would be a counter offer and therefore a new contract. While this does not become enforceable under U.C.C. Article 2, it is enforceable as a verbal contract in court.
After the concert, Gerard tells Kids Care that he has decided not to donate the receipts to the organization. Is Gerard's promise enforceable despite the lack of consideration? Explain. Kids Care Contract Gerard’s promise to Kids Care may still be enforceable despite lack of consideration due to promissory estoppel. Promissory estoppel can be used to enforce a promise.
Kelsey Hall Week 3 Case Study 10-7 Scenario A The client has indicated in their memo that the debt securities which have declined in fair value are not other-than-temporarily impaired and therefore the client does not intend to record an impairment loss in earnings. They have provided some applicable facts which support this decision and which are in accordance with the requirements outlined in the Codification: * They did not intend to sell the debt securities. Under ASC 320-10-35-33A, the intent to sell a debt security automatically creates an other-than-temporary impairment. * They determined that they would not likely be required to sell the securities before recovery of their amortized cost bases. This is the second requirement