What is the law?
- Government involves and having a legal consequences if people break it.
- If I can force you to do it, it is a law. Legal enforcement.
- Natural law theory: transcends human made law just an approximation to the
- Provide social utilities, good for society.
- Measure by if they are good for sociality. Benefit for society.
Civil law vs. Criminal law ---distinguish
- Criminal law: punishment, always involve government, states.
- Civil law: can involve private parties or states. Borden and bar is higher than
Private law vs. Public law: states involved (eg. civil law)
Rich people get better judgment than poor people.
Law is not always fair.
Where the law comes from?
1. Constitutions: no force or fact, trumps all other laws. Government can’t set a law
that against constitution. In most countries, governments are beyond the law.
Not like Canada, Canadian government has to obey the law. 3 main parts
a) Sections.91+ 92: 91:Federal government: banking etc., and 92:Proventil
government: education, security, etc.
b) Charter: rights and freedoms define Canadian. (Religions, thoughts, vote,
legal rights, quality rights: gender ages) 3 limitations
i. Only applies to governments and agents, states, police station.
ii. Can’t trump all the laws, but French must be in a bigger font in Quebec.
Not a standing clause
iii. Reasonable limits
c) Conventions/treaties: they are paramount, conventions: things we not
written down but the way we do it. Achieve result same as the law. Comes
from culture, habits.
2. Legislation/statutes: come from paramount. Laws are moving target. Usually, we
want predict value, what the law will be. The law changes all the time.
3. Common law/ case law: every case comes to the law. You can use other cases to
support your case. You treat this case same as other case alike. It is efficient and
fair. Predictability. But not two cases are ever the same. We have to change over
time. People can appeal if they don’t disagree, but the courts are different.
Legislation trumps the case law. ADR
Tuesday, September 24, 13
Contracts: total unfair. If u voluntarily signs to the contract, this is legal.
Why the law not supports fairness?
- Hard to measure the fairness.
- People decide whether the contrast is fair or not.
- People will decide to enter if they think the contrast is fair or not.
- If u chooses to enter the contract, the law will enforce it.
Why would we put the result of the statement to the contrast?
- Free market.
- Contrasts promote market transactions. It promotes trade in commerce.
- Promise will be useless.
- People won’t involve in the contrasts. Economy will fall apart.
Always ask yourself why there is a law, who benefits it.
2 things are important in contracts.
1. People will not enter into the contracts unless they receive the benefits.
2. Contracts voluntarily entered into are fair.
These 2 assumptions are generally help.
There is a balance between the contract law and fairness.
We don’t use fairness to a contract to be legally bounding. So what do we use?
1. Consensus = offer and acceptation
a) Invitation offer is not a real offer.
b) When the money is put into the business, there is a contract.
c) More than a statement
d) Must be a promise to be bound.
e) The offer is accept when it receive understood.
f) Communicate and understood
g) An offer can be revolted any time before acceptance.
h) When a counter-offer occurs, it breaks the original offer.
i) A rejection kills an offer. Can’t go back and accept it latter.
j) Acceptance also needs to be communicated. (Post box acceptance rule: if the acceptance is offer by mail, when it is mailed, the acceptance is
k) Generally speaking, the clicking contract is enforceable.
2. Neutral consideration. (Value involves into)
a) Love, past consideration (I clean your car, u feels happy and decide to give
me 20$, this is the past consideration, not a contract) are not consideration
b) Must be fresh and new
c) As well, must be legal.
d) Lets say if I am doing what I am legally to do, I’m asking for money for
doing it, this is not a contract.
e) When we have a contract, approach to the end of the contract, I offer to
renew the contract, like saying u need to pay 1.2 millions more for me to
finish this contract, and u agree. This is not enforceable.
f) Under seal, this is legally bounded.
g) Part payment of the debt. If I say I’ll pay u 650 of 1000, can u extend the
deadline of the repay, u said yes
h) Promissory estoppel (exception): 1.existing legal relationship 2.promiss by
one part and not force another 3. Other party relies on my promise. (Only
use as a defense, not sue using this)!!!!! EXAM!!!!! 1 question. Enforce
without consideration. (I given 100millions 3 times, each I say u can use
whatever u want. This time I want u use this for writing. And u using this
for doing other things, I said yes. But latter on, when u finish, I want my
money back, in this case, u can sue me.)
3. Intention. Put agreements into writing: 1. Intention 2. Evidence.
a) Express terms: in words.
b) Imply terms: not in actual wording in the contract, but the court will
assume this exists. Because this is reasonably implied.
c) Intended to provide certainty. Pro-evidence rule: oral commitment can’t be
use as an evident. Can’t be part oral and part paper commitment.
d) I’ll cover as many possibilities as I can.
i. Subsequence: (contractive bound until the condition occurs)
ii. Precedent: (we have no legally obligation before conditions)
f) Limitation clauses: only enforce when party has known them and be very
clear about this. (If people who sign the contract not known what they sign
and not clear, this is not legal bound)
If any of these missing, there will not be a legal contract.
Contract: exchange of something valuable and enforceable.
Earnest money: buy an option. Tuesday, October 8, 13
Minimize risk: (example: bar)
- Create a positive environment
- Hire security
- Buy insurance
All these cost increases, and normally your income will increase.
Tort law had modified people’s behavior, then actually cost distribute to all the
people who use this.
If we want to participate in that activities, u have to pay some money to make it
But we don't like it.
For abnormal accident, u can’t sue for your injury.
This is nobody’s fault. Insurance companies pay.
If u cant work for 10 years, if your future income is $80000. You can’t sue for that;
your present value is 0. There is a tread off between efficiency and those people cant
suit for the situation.
It is controversial, but tort law is clearly fault base, you have to show that your injury
is someone else fault.
Although previous case can s