Case #2 In July, 2016, the plaintiff took His 1978 Pontiac Firebird sports car to the Defendant to get some auto body work done on it. The Defendant agreed to do the work for $3500 and required $1500 in advance, which the plaintiff paid. The plaintiff and Defendant did not specifically agree when the work was to be completed by. The plaintiff purchased and delivered to the Defendant some of the parts required to complete the work valued at $1000. For two years the plaintiff regularly went to the Defendant's shop to check on the progress of the repairs. All that the Defendant told him was that he would get to it when he could and that he had other jobs to do ahead of the plaintiff's before he could start work on the Firebird. He also had changed the location of his business, was unable to start the job because an employee had suffered an injury on the job and because he had to fire a body man for drug use. In July, 2018 the plaintiff decided that enough was enough and that due to nothing having been done on the body work in two years that it would never be done. He went to the Defendant and demanded his money, parts and car back. The Defendant returned the car and the parts, but In July, 2018 the plaintiff decided that enough was enough and that due to nothing having been done on the body work in two years that it would never be done. He went to the Defendant ind demanded his money, parts and car back. The Defendant returned the car and the party, but refused to return the deposit, claiming that he had done more than $1500 worth of work on the vehicle to date. The plaintiff commenced this action claiming return of his $1500 deposit and damages for breach of contract. I 1. What is the legal issue(s)? 2 marks) 2. What is the legal test (rule of law) used by the courts? (1 mark) 3. Develop a logical argument for the plaintiff, applying the rule of law to the facts? (1 mark) 4. Develop a logical argument for the defendants, applying the rule of law to the facts (1 mark) Case #2 In July, 2016, the plaintiff took His 1978 Pontiac Firebird sports car to the Defendant to get some auto body work done on it. The Defendant agreed to do the work for $3500 and required $1500 in advance, which the plaintiff paid. The plaintiff and Defendant did not specifically agree when the work was to be completed by. The plaintiff purchased and delivered to the Defendant some of the parts required to complete the work valued at $1000. For two years the plaintiff regularly went to the Defendant's shop to check on the progress of the repairs. All that the Defendant told him was that he would get to it when he could and that he had other jobs to do ahead of the plaintiff's before he could start work on the Firebird. He also had changed the location of his business, was unable to start the job because an employee had suffered an injury on the job and because he had to fire a body man for drug use. In July, 2018 the plaintiff decided that enough was enough and that due to nothing having been done on the body work in two years that it would never be done. He went to the Defendant and demanded his money, parts and car back. The Defendant returned the car and the parts, but In July, 2018 the plaintiff decided that enough was enough and that due to nothing having been done on the body work in two years that it would never be done. He went to the Defendant ind demanded his money, parts and car back. The Defendant returned the car and the party, but refused to return the deposit, claiming that he had done more than $1500 worth of work on the vehicle to date. The plaintiff commenced this action claiming return of his $1500 deposit and damages for breach of contract. I 1. What is the legal issue(s)? 2 marks) 2. What is the legal test (rule of law) used by the courts? (1 mark) 3. Develop a logical argument for the plaintiff, applying the rule of law to the facts? (1 mark) 4. Develop a logical argument for the defendants, applying the rule of law to the facts (1 mark)
