Case 1

Waddell is based in Manchester and faxed an offer to Xavier in Houston making an offer to sell goods to him. Xavier immediately faxed back and accept the offer. Even though the fax was received in Waddell's office during normal business hours, she did not read it.

Waddell, having no knowledge that Xavier had sent a fax then received a letter fromYaulloffering to buy Waddell's goods. The letter stated that if he did not hear anything,Yaullwould assume the goods were his.

Waddell, not agreeing with the tone ofYaull'sletter, instead offered to sell the goods to Zang. Zang posted a letter of acceptance which Waddell did not receive. Waddell had never indicated to Zang that post was an accepted made of communications as past negotiations have always taken place face-to-face.

Questions:

1.Is there a contract between Waddell and Xavier, and for what reason?

2.Is there a contract between Waddell andYaull, and for what reason?

3.Is there a contract between Waddell andZang,andfor what reason?

Case2

Abid regularly took his car to be serviced at his local garage, Bust Ltd. On the four previous occasions, before handinghis car over to the garage, Abid had always been required to read and sign a contractual document which containedthe following statement in bold red type:

'Bust Ltd accepts no responsibility for any consequential loss or injury sustained as a result of any work carried outby the company, whether as a result of negligence or otherwise.'

On the most recent occasion, due to the fact that the garage was very busy when he arrived, Abid was not asked tosign the usual document. He was, however, given a receipt for the car, which he accepted without reading. BustLtd'susual business terms were printed on the back of the receipt, including the statement above.

On driving the car home after its service, Abid was severely injured when the car suddenly burst into flames. Itsubsequently emerged that the fire had been the result of the negligent work by one of BustLtd'smechanics. BustLtd has accepted that its mechanic was negligent but denies any liability for Abid's injuries, relying on the exclusionclause above.

Advise Abid:

4.whether the exclusion clause was incorporated into his contract with Bust Ltd;

5.As to the possible impact of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 regarding any claim Abid might makeagainst Bust Ltd in relation to his injuries.