Margaret owned an antique store that specialized in rare porcelain dolls. When she opened the business in 1999, it was at a shop in an eastern suburb of Toronto. In 2000 she started to advertise on the Internet and by 2006 the business had grown to the point where she needed help to keep the business going. After a family discussion one night at the kitchen table in July 2006, it was agreed that Margaret would probably keep the business going for another couple of years and then retire. Emily, her youngest daughter and aged 16, would work in the shop as long as was needed and in return, she would receive any unsold dolls. When Margaret retired at the end of 2009, she decided that she would give the unsold stock to charity and they could auction it and keep the proceeds. Advise Emily what she should do.

Case Two:

Mark, while he was so drunk that he didnt know what he was doing, bid successfully at an auction for the purchase of a house. It was clear to the auctioneer that Mark didnt know what he was doing. However, after Mark sobered up he confirmed the contract with the auctioneer. He then subsequently refused to complete the contract.

Case Three:

Jenny received a circular from Beauty and the Beast Hair Salon advertising massages and manicures for $10. Realising that this was an exceptionally good deal, but not surprised because she knew that they had only just opened and were running a number of good opening specials, she rang and made a booking. When Jenny arrived at the salon she was told that there had been a mistake on the circular and it should have said $100. The manager of the salon explained that this was still a good price because normally a massage and manicure would have cost $150. Jenny was furious, as it had taken her 30 minutes to get to the shop by car and if she had known it would cost $100, she would never have made the booking. Advise Jenny. Would your advice have been any different if Jenny had the massage and manicure before being told that the cost was $100? Would she have to pay the full price?

Case Four:

Mr. John requested Catherine to transport goods from Toronto to Darlingtons estate in for the sum of $34000. Catherine replied that she was only prepared to transport the goods for $50000.00.

Mr. John wrote back to Catherine asking to reconsider the initial price, but Catherine did not reply to Mr. Johns letter. Two days later, Mr. John delivered the goods to the Catherines business premises. Catherine delivered the good to Darlington. Now Mr. john has refused to pay the $50000.00. demand by Catherin, saying that there was no concluded contract. Advise the party using relevant authorities.

Case Five:

Mr. Able invited Mr. Rich as his business partner for his sisters marriage. Mr. Rich accepted the invitation, and in this ground Mr. Able booked a table in a costly hotel imagining that Mr. Rich will come to the party where the marriage takes place. Due to some reason Mr. Rich could not come and attend the function. Mr. Able wanted to sue Mr. Rich, can you write your analysis and recommend Mr. Able

Your analysis should be on IDAC Principle, it is an acronym which depicts,

I for Identification-

D for Definition

A for Analysis

C for Conclusion