For Metalcrafters Inc.‚ the first thing I would do is to decide whether or not each alternative is mutually exclusive or independent. In this case‚ the stamping press alternatives are mutually exclusive‚ the extrusion press alternatives are mutually exclusive‚ and the new parts orders are mutually exclusive. Beginning with the stamping press‚ the next thing I would do is figure out what the expected useful life is for each alternative. Because the SX-65 has a useful life of 5 years and the MD-40
Premium Contract Contract law Offer and acceptance
A valid contract consists of all essential components which present and the court will enforce as a legally binding promise . One of the elements contract to create a contract is agreement which included an offer and acceptance. “Acceptance is a final and unqualified assent to the terms of the offer‚ made in the manner specified or indicated by the offeror” . Acceptance may be express orally‚ in writing‚ occasionally‚ or even by implied from the offeree’s conduct. In communication of acceptance‚
Premium Contract Contract law Offer and acceptance
The legal issue in this question is whether there is any binding contract between Julie and Leila and whether Julie can bring an action against Leila for refusing to honour the $50 reward stated in the advertisement that she had placed in the local newspaper. This happened after Julie who had read the advertisement‚ found and returned the advertised locket and chain to Leila’s house to claim the $50 reward. The relevant principle of law relating to this issue is that the advertisement of reward
Premium Invitation to treat Newspaper Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company
Hyde v Wrench(1840) Hyde v Wrench [1840] EWHC Ch J90 is a leading English contract law case on the issue of counter-offers and their relation to initial offers. In it Lord Langdale ruled that any counter-offer cancels the original offer. Wrench offered to sell his farm in Luddenham to Hyde for £1000‚ an offer which Hyde declined. On 6 June 1840 Wrench wrote to Hyde’s agent offering to sell the farm for £1000‚ stating that it was the final offer and that he would not alter from it.[1] Hyde offered
Premium Contract Common law Invitation to treat
Unsolicited Good and Services Act 1. Explain the interpretive difference between ‘means’ and ‘include’‚ using the definitions in section 2. The word ‘means’ suggests that the definition that accompanies it is exhaustive and consequently cannot mean anything different. In some instances the ordinary meaning of the word can limit the intentions of the Act. For example‚ the word ‘unsolicited’ in the Act is given an absolute definition which is more restricted that the ordinary meaning of the word
Premium Contract Law Contract law
Issues 1.Andy vs. Bill Is there any contract between Andy and Bill? • Invitation to offer in general • Acceptance in terms of offer • Meeting of minds 2.Andy vs. Ciara Significant issues which needs to be considered are as follows :- • Query for more information • Acceptance of the offer 3. Andy vs. Denis • Validity of the contract • Acceptance needs to be communicated. Rules and Application Andy vs. Bill 1) Invitation to offer in general – The argument here to be discuss is whether there is
Premium Contract Contract law Offer and acceptance
Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. – Case Brief Summary Summary of Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. [1893] Q.B. 256 (C.A.). Facts Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. (D) manufactured and sold The Carbolic Smoke Ball. The company placed ads in various newspapers offering a reward of 100 pounds to any person who used the smoke ball three times per day as directed and contracted influenza‚ colds‚ or any other disease. After seeing the ad Carlill (P) purchased a ball and used it as directed. Carlill contracted
Premium Contract Invitation to treat
[1893] 1 Q.B. 256 1892 WL 9612 (CA)‚ [1893] 1 Q.B. 256 (Cite as: [1893] 1 Q.B. 256) Page 1 *256 Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Company. In the Court of Appeal. CA Lindley‚ Bowen and A. L. Smith‚ L.JJ. 1892 Dec. 6‚ 7. Contract--Offer by Advertisement--Performance of Condition in Advertisement-- Notification of Acceptance of Offer--Wager--Insurance--8 & 9 Vict. c. 109-- 14 Geo. 3‚ c. 48‚ s. 2. The defendants‚ the proprietors of a medical preparation called "The Carbolic Smoke Ball‚" issued an
Premium Contract Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company Invitation to treat
CASE ANALYSIS: Case: Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Company [1893] 1 QB 256 Introduction: Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Company Ltd is one of the most leading cases in the law of contracts under common law. Known for both its academic importance and its contribution in the development of the laws relating unilateral contracts‚ it is still binding on lower courts in England and Wales‚ and is still cited by judges in their judgements. This research paper aims to critically examine and analyze the
Premium Contract Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company Invitation to treat
Name : Aybike Tamara Surname : Engüzel Student Number : 130601178 LAW 107 LEGAL RESEARCH & WRITING I Mid – Term Examination Project Fall 2013 - 2014 The issue was between Louisa Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. Back at 1892 ‚ There was a big influenza in United Kingdom caused over 1 million people
Premium Influenza Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company Invitation to treat