Consider the following independent situations:

1. Moe Durgs drove his car to a shopping mall and parked it there to go to a movie. A sign at the entrance where Moe drove in designated the place where he parked as a one-hour parking space. There were many similar-looking signs around the shopping mall stating that people were parking their cars at their own risk. The sign at the entrance was the only one that was different and stated that the time limit for parking there was one hour, and that as a term of the contract anyone parking over this one-hour limit would have to pay a fee of $60. When Moe returned to his car from the movie, he found a ticket on his car (a demand for payment of the $60). Moe refused to pay and was sued.

2. Kea Dalaw started a small business and agreed to pay Haley Dalaw, his wife, $1,700 per month for her bookkeeping services. This was primarily a method of income-splitting for tax purposes. Unfortunately, the business was NOT as successful as they had imagined, and Kea could NOT afford to pay Haley that much money from the business. The marriage deteriorated, and after separation, Haley brought an action against Kea demanding back pay for the last 11 months, as well as compensation for loss of future earnings.

Required:

a) Explain what Moe's defence is, and use case facts to support your response.

b) Explain what Kea's defence is, and use case facts to support your response.