Answered step by step
Verified Expert Solution
Link Copied!

Question

1 Approved Answer

Case 1 Victor owned and operated a large refrigeratedhighway transport truck. He entered into a contractwith Meat Packers Ltd. to haul large sides of beef'or

Case 1

Victor owned and operated a large refrigeratedhighway transport truck. He entered into a contractwith Meat Packers Ltd. to haul large sides of beef'or them at a fixed price per load for a period ofsixmonths, commencing July 2. On June 28,heappeared at the packing plant with his truck to see the loading facilities. When heexamined the freezerplant, he discovered that he would require an extraemployee to help him load and unload the meat. He then realized that he had made a contract that hecould only perform at a substantial loss.He informed one of the owners with whom hehad contracted that he could not perform the agreement. The owner persuaded victor to wait until thenext day, when he could discuss the matter with theother owners.Victor agreed to wait and left his truckinthe company's garage overnight. During the night, a fire at the garage destroyedthe garage and Victor's truck.

Analyze the events that occurred in thiscase, anddiscuss the legal position of both parties.

Case 2

Highway contractors Inc. owned and operateda number ofgravel pits that it used as a source of supply for its highway construction projects. Evans, the company president, was always on the look-out for additional sources of supply and, while driving along a country road, noticed what appeared to be an odd-shaped formation on a farm property that he suspected might contain a quantity of gravel. He decided to purchase the farm in his own name and later transfer it to his company. He offered the owner of the property $350,000 for the land, and the farm owner agreed to sell the property. A purchase agreement wasprepared and signed by the parties. Before the date for exchange of the deed and the money, the farm owner heardrumoursthat Evans was buying the farm because it contained a large amount of gravel. The property owner accused Evans of trying to steal her farm, even though the purchase price offered was slightly more than the value of most other farms in the area. The farm owner instructed her lawyer not topreparethe deed, and when Evans arrived at the farm gate, the farm owner refused him entry. Evans pointed to his brief case and said he had themoneybut the farm owner refused to sell the farm, and he returned to the city.

Discuss the rights and duties of the parties in this case. Render a decision.

Case 3

Highway Grading Contractors purchased a newback hoefrom Construction Equipment Company, a firm that specialized in the sale of large, earth moving equipment. In the six months following delivery, theback hoeexperienced numerous breakdowns, both major and minor. The equipment was out of service on 12 occasions, usually for minor problems, such as parts breakage. On six occasions, the breakdown was serious and required major parts replacement, causing theback hoeto be out of service for several days.All ofthe repair work was done under warranty by the manufacturer's dealer, at no cost to Highway Grading Contractors. At the end of the six months, on the 13th breakdown, Highway Grading Contractors left theback hoewith the dealer and demanded that the purchase price be returned. Construction Equipment Company Ltd. refused, and Highway Grading Contractors decided to take legal action against the seller for a return of the purchase price.

Indicate the nature of the claim of Highway Grading Contractors and thedefences(if any) of Construction

Equipment Company. Render a decision.

Case 4

Tinaentered intoa contract with Home TV Production to perform the leading role in a television mini-series the company wished to produce. The contract called for Tina, who was an experienced actress, to devote her time exclusively to the production until the recording of her part was complete, a period of some six weeks. Her compensation was to be $30,000. A week after the contract was signed, Tina notified the company that she did not intend 0 perform the role and that the company should find a new leading actress for the production. The company immediatelymade an effortto find a substitute for Tina but, after an exhaustive search, could not find a suitable replacement for her role.As a consequence, they were obliged to abandon their plans for the production. During the week after signing Tina, the company incurred liability of $25,000 under contracts they hadentered intofor services and commitments made in anticipation of her starring in the production. They also incurred the sum of $3,000 in expenses paid to a search group to find a substitute when Tina refused to perform. The company instituted legal proceedings against Tina to recover the total expenses incurred as a result of her repudiation. In response, Tina offered a settlement of $3,000 to cover expenses incurred in their search for a substitute performer.

Discuss the arguments of theparties, andrender a decision.

Case 5

On June 1, Bethune entered into an agreement to purchase the Happy Hour Bar and Restaurant. The purchase price was $400,000, with a down payment of $50,000.Thebalance was payable September 1, when Bethune was to take possession of the business. In anticipation of his start in the restaurant business, Bethune quit his job and enrolled in a three-month community college course on restaurant management. On August 1, the owner of the restaurant notified Bethune that she had received another offer to purchase the restaurant for $425,000 and she intended to sell the businesses to the offeror. Bethune objected to the restaurant owner's actions and threatened to take legal action against her if she proceeded with the proposed sale. A few days later, the restaurant owner did, in fact, enter into an agreement to sell the business tVolrath, the new purchaser, for the purchase price of $425,000. The closing date of the transaction was to be September 1. She then mailed a cheque to Bethune for the $50,000 she had received from his previously as his deposit. Bethune immediately returned the cheque an insisted that the restaurant ownerproceedwith the sale of the restaurant to him in accordance with their agreement.

On Aug 28 the local newspaper contained an announcement of the opening of a new restaurant in a large office building across the street from the Happy Hour Bar and Restaurant. The office building housed most of the customers of the Happy Hour Bar and Restaurant, and the new restaurant could beexceptedto take two thirds of the lunch customers and one third of the dinner customers from the Happy Hour Bar.

The enouncement came as a surprise to all parties.Volrathimmediately wrote a letter to the owner of the Happy Hour Bar in which he indicated that he did not intend to proceed with the transaction unless the owner reduced the purchase price to $200,000. Bethune was out of town on business on Aug 28 and he did not become aware of the new competitor until Sept 1 the proposed closing date for his purchase of the restaurant.

Advise each of the parties of their legal position.

Case 6

Robot Software Corp produced sophisticated software programs for computer assisted robots. Robot Software Corp was engaged by Robot Equipment Ltd. To develop software that would enable it to design robots to do more technically difficult jobs on productions lines. Robot Equipment ltd. Provided the engineering data necessary to develop the program and Robot Software Corpprepared the software.

The Software was tested by both Robot Software Corp and Robot Equipment Ltd. Using a similar robot with known design and performance characteristics as a model. The software appeared to workproperlyand robot equipment used the program to design a new complexmulti userobot.

Unknown to Robot Equipment Ltd. The input of design datain particular sequencewould have the effect of cancelling out the safety factor to be built into the robot. The input sequence was not the sequence used in thetestbut a technician used the particular input sequence in testing the new robot model. As aresultwhen the new robot was tested the electrical system overheated and caught fire. The fire destroyed the equipment.

Robot Equipment Ltd. Brought a legal action against Robot Software Corp claiming $500,000 damages asitloss in the construction of the faulty robot. Discuss the argument and render a decision.

Case 7

A wholesale florist decided to grow a variety of patented, hybrid flowerson the basis ofthe success that its competitors had with the particular varieties. The florist purchased seeds for the flowervaritiesfrom the catalogue of the commercial seed suppliers.

The seeds were planted according to proper planting instructions and cultivated in accordance with accepted agricultural practices. Weather conditions were normal though out the growing season butin spite ofthis the seeds produced a very poor crop.

The florist informed the seed supplier that the crop had failed even though it had used proper growing techniques. The florist demanded that the seed company compensate it for the loss. The seed company rejected the complaint and pointed out the seed purchase contract term which stated

The vendor warrants seed as to variety named and makes no warranty express or implied as to quality or quantity of crop produced from the seed supplied. Any Responsibility of the vendor is limited to the price paid for the seed by the purchaser.

When the seed company refused to entertain thecomplaintthe florist decided to take legal action to recover its loss. Discuss the arguments andmake a decision.

Step by Step Solution

There are 3 Steps involved in it

Step: 1

blur-text-image

Get Instant Access to Expert-Tailored Solutions

See step-by-step solutions with expert insights and AI powered tools for academic success

Step: 2

blur-text-image

Step: 3

blur-text-image

Ace Your Homework with AI

Get the answers you need in no time with our AI-driven, step-by-step assistance

Get Started

Recommended Textbook for

Business Law in Canada

Authors: Richard A. Yates, Teresa Bereznicki Korol, Trevor Clarke

10th Canadian Edition

133249093, 978-0132164412, 132164418, 978-0133249095

More Books

Students also viewed these Law questions

Question

What best creates value with marketing activities

Answered: 1 week ago