- Eric bought a house for $150 000. He paid $25 000 immediately and promised the seller
that he would pay the remainder in monthly instalments over the next ten years. Eric then
told his daughter, Naomi, that he would give the house to her if and when she paid all of
the monthly payments. Naomi was reluctant to commit herself to that arrangement
because she was not sure if she would always have enough money to make the payments.
Eric said to her, "Well, let's see how it goes." Naomi made the monthly payments for six
years. Unfortunately, she and her father then began to fight. At that point, he told her that
the deal was off. Eric has offered to repay Naomi for all of the payments that she had
made, but he insists that the house will always belong to him. The market value of the
house has recently and unexpectedly increased from $150 000 to $400 000. Which of the
following statements is most likely TRUE?
Eric is required to give Naomi an opportunity to finish completing the payments,
and if she does so, she is entitled to the house.
- The case of Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co is best known for dealing with the issue of
- Quality Kitchens Inc operates a store that sells kitchen utensils and gadgets. In an attempt
to increase sales, the store ran an advertisement in a newspaper that featured Juicy Brand
Blenders for $49.99. Martha rushed to the store with the intention of buying a blender.
When she arrived however, she was told that while there were no such blenders in stock,
the store did have several Swirl Brand Blenders to sell for $99.99 each. After a bit of
investigation, Martha discovered that the store knew that it never had any Juicy Brand
Blenders, and that it was simply hoping that shoppers would buy the Swirl Brand
Blenders once they got inside the store. Which of the following statements is TRUE
The store is guilty of a bait and switch
- The phrase quid pro quo means
something for something
- The phrase consensus ad idem means
agreement on that previously mentioned
- In late April, Harper Corp placed an advertisement in a newspaper that said: "We cater
parties. Up to 150 people for only $3000. No hidden fees or costs." The manager of
Martin Inc telephoned Harper and left a voice message that said, "We are calling to place
an order to have a party for 150 people on the first of June." The next day, the manager of
Harper called Martin and explained that, due to a scheduling conflict, it could not stage a
party on the first of June. Martin now says that a contract had been created and that
Harper has breached that agreement. Which of the following statements is TRUE?
because an advertisement is presumed to be an invitation to treat, Martin's telephone
message probably was not a contractual acceptance
- Garfield owns and operates a wholesale business called the Overseas Sporting Goods
Store (OSGS). He recently delivered a box of cricket balls to his twenty-year-old son,
Imran, and a box of cricket outfits to another sporting goods store called Hit-for-Six. Because Garfield's store went into financial difficulties shortly after making those
deliveries to Imran and Hit-for-Six, questions have arisen regarding the nature of those
deliveries. Which of the following statements is TRUE?
Depending upon the facts, a court mig