- •Introduction 8
- •Introduction 11
- •Introduction 15
- •Introduction
- •Explanation of the importance of the essential elements required for the formation of a valid contract
- •What is contract?
- •What are the main parts of a valid contract?
- •Agreement
- •Consideration
- •Intention
- •Capacity
- •Discussion about the impact of different types of contract Classification of contracts
- •The impact of different types of contract
- •1.3 Analysis of terms in contracts with reference to their meaning and effect Express and implied terms
- •Conditions and warranties, innominate terms
- •Exclusion clauses and onerous terms
- •Case of Mr b and Mr c jr
- •Case of Mr d, Mr a, Mr b and Miss e
- •Case of Mr a, Professor f and Doctor g
- •Case of father of Mr c jr, Mr c and Mr b
- •Case of Mr a and Miss e
- •2.2 Applying the law on terms in different contracts
- •Case of salesman from Tills Ltd - Mr h and Mr a
- •Case of Mr a and Mr I
- •2.3 Evaluating the effect of different terms and conditions Case of Mr a and Tills Ltd
- •Case of Mr a and Tills Ltd, PayPal
- •Conclusion
- •Introduction
- •3.1 Contrasting liability in tort with contractual liability
- •Types of tort
- •3.2 Explanation of the nature of liability in negligence
- •3.2.1 Owed a duty of care
- •Duty of care for economic loss
- •Continued occupiers liability
- •3.2.2 Breach of duty of care
- •Continued principles affecting standard of care
- •Defences
- •3.3 Explanation how a business can be vicariously liable
- •Case of Mrs y and Miss z
- •Case of Mr w and Miss z
- •Case of Mr V and Miss z
- •Case of Miss z, stu advertising agency and pqr
- •Case of pqr and Miss z
- •4.2 Applying the elements of vicarious liability
- •Case of Mr o, Mr n, Mr m and Miss z
- •Case of Mr o, Miss z and Mr l
- •Case of Mr o, Mr k and Miss z
- •Conclusion
Case of Mrs y and Miss z
Mrs Y has to cancel a contract she had to carry out four days work worth £400 because of the injury she got in the fitness centre. And she wants to sue Miss Z for that financial loss as well as for any future work she may lost because her rival took the contract over and has secured more work worth £2,300. According to the law, she can claim £400 because this loss was because of Miss Z, but she cannot claim for future profit. To confirm Mrs Y`s rights Miss Z can use Muirhead v Industrial Tank Specialities Ltd case.
Case of Mr w and Miss z
One day Mr W came to the fitness centre to lose some weight and while doing exercises he felt pain in his chest. Miss Z to continue doing because he should “feel the burn”, but she said that about muscles. Later Mr W met heart problems and he wants to sue. I can say that Mr W and Miss Z did not know each other before. From first sight Miss Z could understand that Mr W is vulnerable because he is unfit and this opinion of Miss Z was based on her experience and particular skills. She breached the duty of care because Mr W was a new client and Miss Z did not find out anything about his health. That is why Mr W can sue Miss Z.
Case of Mr V and Miss z
Mr V moved a sign ‘caution wet floor’ to allow him to walk under a ladder used by the centre`s maintenance man. Suddenly a boy started to shout because the ladder had fallen on his head. He wants to sue Miss Z because she is the owner and manager of this centre. Staff of the centre put that sign because they know they owed a duty of care and they can use novus actus interveniens as a defence because Mr V moved the sign.
Case of Miss z, stu advertising agency and pqr
There is STU above the fitness centre who hired decorators who were using an electric lift which shorted out the electricity in the whole building. That caused losses for Miss Z for the rest of the day and she wants to sue STU. STU has breached the duty of care after neighbours. But Miss Z cannot sue STU, she can claim for financial losses to PQR only because their workers did damage to her business. This situation is similar to Welsh Plastic case.
Case of pqr and Miss z
PQR`s workers were using a tin of paint that had fallen to someone`s car, but the owner uses the brief case to protect his car and it deflected the pain onto Miss Z`s car. She wants to sue, but the defence of PQR is novus actus interveniens. They can use that as a defence according to Scott v Shepherd case. If they damage the first car they will be liable for those damages, but they cannot be responsible for damages done to Miss Z`s car.
4.2 Applying the elements of vicarious liability
According to elements of vicarious liability I will explain if there is a contact, how the law applies, can someone sue in scenario 5.
Case of Mr o, Mr n, Mr m and Miss z
Mr O works at the reception part time but he is allowed to use weights room. He was illegally selling steroid to the clients that causes impotence. Two weightlifters Mr N and Mr M want to sue Miss Z (tort of negligence and defences) for health damages and moral compensation. Can they do it? Well, they sue Miss Z if there are two factors: if Mr O is an employee of the fitness centre and the actions he has made were related to his work duties. If he is an employee (Miss Z gives him orders, control his performance, when and how he is act) he has a chance to sell steroids – in that case Miss Z is liable for him. Another possible situation is when he is not an employee selling steroid in weights room – he can be one of clients - he is liable for himself, but if he sells at the reception – Miss Z is liable. The last case is similar to Lister v Hesley Hal: when he is an employee and he is doing activities related to his work place but not his straight duties – then Miss Z is not liable for him and he is liable for himself.