Fulfilment of Obligations for a Contract

Fulfilment of Obligations for a Contract Jack’s purchase of â€Å"the machine† from Jim of Agricultural Supplies Ltd is one for a specific purpose. The contract with ASDA will no doubt reap substantial reward. The machine is a fundamental part of that agreement, as Jack cannot fulfill his obligations without it. The importance of the machine being able to produce vegetables that comply with the terms of the contract with ASDA was brought to the attention of Jim at the time the contract was entered into. The question of whether Jack can recover anything beyond the price of the machine after it fails to deliver will initially depend upon the interpretation of the exclusion clause. The contract specifically excludes liability for any consequential loss whatsoever. This would include the loss of profit to be suffered by Jack as a result of ASDA summarily terminating their agreement. Such terms are however subject to the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977, and more specifically s. 3[1], and the test of reasonableness contained within s. 11. There is a standard requirement that the term is â€Å"fair and reasonable[2]† but what amounts to this will be a question of fact in each case. Not only will it look at the extent of what the clause is attempting to exclude, but also the bargaining position of the parties. As both are essentially acting â€Å"in the course of a business† there is a suggestion that there is an equal footing and the greater the equality, the more likely that an exclusion clause will be considered reasonable[3]. What is fair to infer from the facts of this case, is that Jack is not an experienced businessman with an understanding as to the operation of a clause that would exclude liability. He may well have noticed its presence, but requires firm clarification as to what he can actually recover in the event of a breach. It is Jim’s response that leads to the exclusion clause probably becoming unenforceable. The clause is attempting to limit the liability of Agricultural Supplies Ltd but Jim, a company Director contradicts this position and assures Jack that any consequential losses will be covered in the event of a breach. S 11(1) UCTA 1977 states that the term may be considered reasonable having regard to the circumstances known to, or in the contemplation of the parties when the contract was made. It would be harsh in this case to deny Jack the ability to rely upon Jim’s assurances. Certainly there is a strong argument that Jim’s statement will become a term of the con tract, overriding the earlier exclusion clause. It was the parties’ true intention and to allow the exclusion clause to stand would not only be unreasonable, but an inaccurate reflection of that intention[4]. Assuming therefore that the exclusion clause itself does not prevent a claim in principle for losses beyond the defective machine, we can consider the issue of lost profit arising from the agreement with ASDA. It has traditionally been the accepted practice of assessment of damages in the area of contract, that lost profit following a breach are subject to tests of causation and mitigation. While the general rule in contract law is to put the claimant in the same position as if those terms had been fulfilled[5], it is still necessary for the Court to assess such damages in monetary terms. In Jack’s situation he has an expectation interest which is defined as â€Å"the benefit [the claimant] expected to receive from the completion of the promised performance of the other party’s obligation, but which were in the event prevented by the breach of contract committed by [the defendant][6]†. The difficulty here is that while there is a definable loss i.e. the profit from the contract with ASDA, there is no knowing how long that contract would continue for or how much Jack would receive per annum. Where significant loss has been sustained, the Courts will look to the availabl e evidence to assess quantum[7]. But whether this alone would suffice is debatable. The difficulty is causation; to what extent was this breach of contract the effective or dominant cause of the loss[8]? The case of Headley v. Baxendale (1854)[9] laid down the rule regarding recovery of losses that were allegedly too remote. In modern terms it is stated to be: â€Å"A type or kind of loss is not too remote a consequence of a breach of contract is, at the time of contracting (and on the assumption that the parties actually foresaw the breach in question) it was within their reasonable contemplation as a not unlikely result of that breach[10]†. It would certainly appear therefore that such contemplation was well within the mind of both Jack and Jim at the time of entering into the contract. Indeed, Jack showed Jim a copy of the agreement with ASDA and his statement that Agricultural Supplies Ltd would â€Å"see to it that Jack is compensated for any loss he incurs† certainly seems to suggest an acceptance of the types of loss i.e. future profit, which Jack would now seek to recover. The recent judgment of the House of Lords in Transfield Shipping Inc v. Mercator Shipping Inc (The Achilleas) (2008)[11] has however thrown such assumptions wide open. This case concerned the hire of a ship for a certain period. The defendant failed to return the ship on time and as a result, the claimant lost a contract with a third party. While the defendant accepted that â€Å"in the trade† compensation would have to be paid, the disputed that they were liable for the loss of profit under the second contract. The arbitrators at first instance and the Court of Appeal[12] found for the claimant. The House of Lords however reversed that decision finding for the defendant. The issue of â€Å"assumption of responsibility† was at the forefront of the Lords’ considerations in this matter. While the defendant’s accepted that some losses would be sustained for which they may be liable, the Court felt that the particular kind of loss was not reasonably contemplated. As Lord Hope of Craighead stated[13]; â€Å"a party cannot be expected to assume responsibility for something that he cannot control and, because he does not know anything about it, cannot quantify. It is not enough for him to know in general and on open-ended terms that there is likely to be a follow-on [contract]† What has been established by the case is a second limb to the test in Headley v. Baxendale. A claimant will not necessarily recover losses that were not unlikely to occur in the usual course of things, if the defendant cannot reasonably be regarded as having assumed responsibility for losses of the particular kind suffered[14]. No longer can it be said that such losses were likely, probable or foreseeable alone, the particular type of loss must have been contemplated by the defendant and he nevertheless accepted the risk in the event of a breach. While this issue of a certain type of loss is not a new phenomenon[15], the combination with the test in Headley v. Baxendale has redressed the scope of recovery in contract cases and particularly the issue of remoteness of damage. Baroness Hale[16] has referred to this extension as â€Å"adding a novel dimension to the way in which the question of remoteness of damage in contract is to be answered†. What this case has done is establi sh a negligence type assessment for causation in contract. While the issue of remoteness, and whether the kind of loss was â€Å"not unlikely† to occur remains a question of fact, the issue of whether it was reasonable to assume the defendant accepted responsibility for that particular type of risk is a question in law[17]. Whether this will assist Jack is not clear. It has been suggested that the effect of The Achilleas upon Sale of Goods Act 1979 claims (as is Jack’s) may have relevance. S. 52(2) of the SGA 1979 states that; â€Å"The measure of damages is the estimated loss directly and naturally resulting, in the ordinary course of events, from the seller’s breach of contract†. If such loss of profit from the agreement with ASDA is to be â€Å"not unlikely† to occur, then Jack may have to establish that Jim assumed responsibility for that particular type of loss. In Chitty on Contracts[18] it is submitted that the House of Lords see their decision as a separate rule when applicable to sale of goods contracts. It should be noted that the facts of The Achilleas related to shipping contracts and the House noted that lack of case law considering this specific issue. While not limited to this area of law, the decision as opposed to other areas i.e. sale of goods, needs to be watched with trepidation. Ultimately there are reasonable prospects for Jack to secure damages beyond the cost of the machine. It can certainly be argued that Jim accepted the risk of the particular type when he was referred to the contract with ASDA. The loss of profit resulting from the termination of that agreement is not the only possible pecuniary disadvantage Jack could suffer i.e. damages claimed by ASDA, returned goods through poor quality etc. This coupled with the uncertainty as to the duration and net value of the contract makes quantum an almost impossible task. It should be noted that such losses have been recovered in Victoria Laundry (Windsor) v. Newman Industries (1949)[19], and more specifically for lost profit arising out of defective equipment under a contract of sale in H Parsons (Livestock) Ltd v. Uttley Ingham Co Ltd (1978)[20]. However the particular circumstances of Jack’s contract are quite unique, and the possible extension of the remoteness rule will not appear to be a help. BIBLIOGRAPHY Chitty on Contracts; Thirteenth Edition 2008, Sweet Maxwell Publishing Peel, E.; â€Å"Remoteness Revisited†, L.Q.R. 2009, 125(Jan), 6-12 Poole, J.; â€Å"Casebook on Contract Law†, Ninth Edition 2008, Oxford University Press McKendrick, E.; â€Å"Contract Law: Text Cases and Materials† Third Edition 2008, Oxford University Press Tamblyn, N; â€Å"Damages Under String Contracts for Sale of Goods†, J.B.L. 2009, 1, 1-14 Rose, F.; â€Å"Blackstone’s Statutes on Contract, Tort Restitution 2008-2009†, Nineteenth Edition 2008, Blackstone Press www.westlaw.co.uk – as accessed on 22nd December 2008 1 Footnotes [1] UCTA 1977 s. 3(1) â€Å"This section applies as between contracting parties where one of them deals†¦on the other’s written standard terms of business†; Chester Grosvenor Hotel Co Ltd v. Alfred McApline Management Ltd [1991] 56 Build LR 115 [2] UCTA 1977 s. 11(1) [3] Watford Electronics Ltd v. Sanderson CFL Ltd [2001] All ER (D) 290 CA [4] This section can be expanded upon to include additional cases on exclusion clauses in any text book. There is also an argument for rectification by mistake i.e. Joscelyne v. Nissen [1970] 2 QB 86 (CA) [5] Golden Strait Corp v. Nippon Yusen Kubishika Kaisha [2007] UKHL 12 [6] Chitty on Contracts: Thirteenth Edition, Volume I, at para 26-002 [7] Tai Hing Cotton Mill Ltd v. Kamsing Knitting Factory [1979] A.C. 91, 106. [8] Ibid fn 6 at para 26-032 [9] [1854] 9 Ex. 341 [10] Ibid fn 6 at para 26-054; see also Koufos v. C. Czarnikow Ltd (The Heron II) [1969] 1 A.C. 350 [11] [2008] UKHL 48 [12] [2007] Lloyd’s Rep 555 [13] Ibid fn 11 at para 36 [14] Ibid fn 6 at para 26-100A [15] Victoria Laundry (Windsor) v. Newman Industries [1949] 2 K.B. 528 [16] Ibid fn 11 at para 93 [17] Ibid at para 22 per Lord Hoffman [18] Ibid fn 6 at para 26-100G [19] Ibid fn 15 [20] [1978] Q.B. 791

Dutch - The Worst Movie :: essays papers

Dutch - The Worst Movie The worst movie I have seen lately has to be Dutch. A less than heart warming movie about a misunderstood little rich kid and his mother's working class boyfriend traveling home for thanks giving dinner. They go on to a have a not so exciting adventure with a totally ridiculous story driving this train wreck. Not only is everything that happens in this story totally unbelievable. Each event gives you another reason to dislike one of the characters a little more. By the end of this movie I found myself not caring if these to made it home or died in the process. In the beginning of the story the boy's mother and father have gotten a divorce. I was a messy affair leaving the mother at the mercy of the father. She has moved on and started dating a man named Dutch with a working class background. The boy, Henry, is away at boarding school awaiting his father's visit that will never happen. The mother desperate to be there for her son tries to convince him to come see her for the holiday. Henry refuses because he blames his mother for not making her marriage work. And this is were the whole thing falls apart. The mother, Mary, decides that she would really like for her son to come to her house. So she sends Dutch to go up and bring the boy to her. So off like a bounty hunter in the old west Dutch goes out to get his man. And our adventure begins. Now right here is were I get a little confused. I just can't help to wonder why Dutch, a man this poor boy has never met, is going to pick him up. Its not like this school is an hour away it’s a couple a day's in the car together. And this might be ok under better conditions. But, considering that this child has a lot of anger towards his mother. You would think that this would be a good opportunity for them to talk. Not to mention the fact that Henry hasn't excepted his parents divorce and the last thing he is going to want to do is meet her new boyfriend, who is taking his father's place in Mary's life. His mother doesn't even consider coming with. Not that she is busy or any thing.

National Reconciliation Ordinance

On October 05, 2007, General Pervez Musharaf promulgated the NRO to give an immediate relief and forgiveness to public office holders, who were charged in corruption cases between 1986 and 1999 under Article 5(1)(2) of (PCO) Provisional Constitutional Order. One of the most consolidate reason behind NRO was to give an immediate relief to late PPP chairperson Benazir Bhutto by giving protection in all cases registered against her by Nawaz government . The NRO also protected our current President Mr. Asif Ali Zardari and Ms Bhutto against $60 million Swiss bribe and Geneva simple money laundering cases.The case was pending in the Swiss court when General Musharaf promulgated the NRO and the government dropped all the cases in April, 2008. An accountability court also cleared Mr. Asif Ali Zardari on March 05, 2008, of five corruption charges and illegal use of property under the NRO. The Supreme Court of Pakistan on December 16, 2009, declared the (NRO) National reconciliation ordinance null and void and declared that all the cases which were active at the time of promulgation of the NRO may be reopened at the point at which they were closed.A 17-members bench of the Apex court headed by the Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudry declared the NRO an instrument null and void because it violates the various constitutional provisions including Article 4, 8 , 25 , 62 (f) and others. The presidency of Pakistan announced that the government accepts and respects the verdict of the Supreme Court. The President enjoys the protection of Article 248 (2) of the constitution. The article 248 (2) states that â€Å"No criminal proceedings continued against the President or a governor in any court during his term of office†.

Two Case Studies for Police Officers - 2992 Words

In life there are a lot of issues that involve social psychology. Being a police officer is a profession that encounters a lot of social psychology issues. One issue that all police officers have to encounter is prejudice. Police officers have to not be prejudiced against the citizens that they are trying to protect and serve the criminals that they must apprehend and also against each other. Two case studies that will be discussed are prejudice against female police officers by their male counterparts and racial prejudice against potential criminals. Youre a female cop. You arrive to your precinct fifteen minutes before you scheduled time to prepare yourself for the day, and you patiently wait for your partner to arrive. Fifteen†¦show more content†¦Discrimination, defined as: Negative behavior directed against people because of their membership to a particular group. (Brehm, Kassin, Fein, 2005) Many of the male counterparts in the police force will discriminate against women because they are female. Being a member of the female group, may complicate many things for a females police experience. Prejudice defined as: Negative feelings toward people because of their membership in certain groups. (Brehm, Kassin, Fein, 2005). Prejudice is very similar to discrimination, but the fact that the male counterparts may have these prejudiced beliefs about women because they are a female, will impact their actions towards the female officer. Stereotyping defined as: A belief that associates a group of people with certain tr aits. (Brehm, Kassin, Fein, 2005). There are a lot of negative stereotypes associated with being a woman such as being weaker than men and less intelligent. These stereotypes will greatly hinder a female officers ability to prove themselves to these male counterparts. These issues all came up in the situation that was presented earlier. When the male partner told the female partner to stay in the car, the female was encountering all of these behaviors. However, these are not the only psychological factors you will have to deal with. When the male police officers decide to exclude a female officer from socialShow MoreRelatedEssay about Two Case Studies for Police Officers2960 Words   |  12 Pagesissues that involve social psychology. Being a police officer is a profession that encounters a lot of social psychology issues. One issue that all police officers have to encounter is prejudice. Police officers have to not be prejudiced against the citizens that they are trying to protect and serve the criminals that they must apprehend and also against each other. Two case studies that will be discussed are prejudice against female police officers by their male counterparts and racial prejudiceRead MoreCase Study #2 Police brutality is becoming more and more apparent in the news today because it1400 Words   |  6 PagesCase Study #2 Police brutality is becoming more and more apparent in the news today because it seems to be occurring more than before. In 2012, the NYPD killed 21 people that year which was an increase by 7 from the previous year (W.A.T.E.R, 1). The numbers are rising in the big cities where more crimes are likely to happen. Toronto isn’t as big as New York City, but it comes to show that police officers are killing more individuals each year. In 2009, in the little city of Cabbagetown near TorontoRead MoreWhite Power, Black Crime, And Racial Politics1511 Words   |  7 Pagesprofiling and racial discrimination against blacks in criminal justice administration can date back into the late 1600’s.† (Staples 2011) This is when the court officials in Philadelphia authorized the police to take up any â€Å"Negro† seen â€Å"gadding about† without a pass from his or her master† One case of police brutality and profiling is the incidents that happen to Dr. the According to Robert Staples, â€Å"Gates’s assertion that he was mistreated because he was black is historically accurate, as whites andRead MoreLaw Enforcement: The Following Case Study Is From The Baltimore1306 Words   |  6 PagesLaw Enforcement: The following case study is from the Baltimore Police Department April 2015 and involves a young African-American man named Freddie Gray and how he was mistreated, arrested, and killed by Baltimore Police. Freddie Gray was running when he was stopped and pinned to the ground by police officers. The officers stated that Gray had a knife on him but did not see or find one until after he was detained. Gray was screaming when he was being detained and he also requested an inhaler, whichRead MoreThe Effects Of Excessive Police Violence On Citizen Crime Reporting Essay1579 Words   |  7 PagesPurpose This study examines how incidents of excessive police violence influence citizen crime reporting. As our main case study, we examine one of Milwaukee’s most publicized moments of police brutality: the 2004 beating of an unarmed black man, Frank Jude, by white police officers. Using an interrupted time series design, we analyze patterns of police-related 911 calls before and after the Jude beating was made public in the Milwaukee press. Controlling for several neighborhood characteristicsRead MoreEssay on Code of Ethics and Security Case Study1600 Words   |  7 PagesSecurity Case Study December 20, 2010 Abstract As we examine the case of â€Å"Cop Gets 15 Years in Torture Case†, we evaluate from four different perspectives the different ethical theories; ethical relativism, ethical egoism, deontological ethics and ontological ethics to determine how the different perspectives support or condemn the conduct in this  case study. The case involves the brutal sodomizing of a black male Haitian immigrant, Abner Louima by two white New York police officers in 1997Read MoreExcessive Force And Police Brutality1238 Words   |  5 PagesINTRODUCTION Excessive force and police brutality have become common terms for anyone keeping up with today’s current events. In 2014, the media covered numerous cases of excessive force that resulted in the deaths of several people of color (Nelson Staff, 2014). The most widely covered cases by the media in 2014 were of Michael Brown, an 18-year-old black male shot and killed by police officer Darren Wilson in Ferguson, Missouri; and Eric Garner, a 43-year-old black male in Staten Island, NewRead MoreThe Effects Of Excessive Police Violence On Citizen Crime Reporting Essay1681 Words   |  7 PagesThis study examines how incidents of excessive police violence influence citizen crime reporting. As our main case study, we examine one of Milwaukee’s most publicized moments of police brutality: the 2004 beating of an unarmed black man, Frank Jude, by white police officers. Using an interrupted time series design, we analyze patterns of police-related 911 calls before and after the J ude beating was made public in the Milwaukee press. Controlling for several neighborhood characteristics, along withRead MorePros and Cons of the Exclusionary Rule1538 Words   |  7 Pagesviolations of constitutional rights by police and prosecutors. A number of studies and testimonies by police officers support this contention. 2. It manifests society’s refusal to convict lawbreakers by relying on official lawlessness—a clear demonstration of our commitment to the rule of law that states that no person, not even a law enforcement official, is above the law. 3. It results in the freeing of the guilty in a relatively small proportion of cases. A 1978 study by the General Accounting OfficeRead MoreThe Role Of A Supervisor894 Words   |  4 PagesWhen an officer uses force on a suspect, Commander Pitcher explains that reporting to the department managers on what happened in an incident from an objective perspective is critical to the investigation. â€Å"Officers must be able to justify to their management each individual punch, kick, baton swing, gun shots, and Taser rounds. If an officer cannot justify all of their actions against the suspect then this becomes excessive force and or unauthorized force.† (Commander Pitcher, date). The role of