Please answer these questions below:

1. A contract is a set of

Select one:

a.Opinions

b.Arguments

c.Promises

d.Statements

2. Which of the following would not be considered good consideration?

Select one:

a. A promise to be a better friend

b. Natural love and affection

c. All these are examples of promises that are not valid consideration

d. Where the promisee agrees to be bound in honour only

3. Which one of the following is not an example of valid consideration?

Select one:

a. I promise to not mow my lawn before 9am

b. I paint your house and you pay $1000 to Tony in return

c. I owe you $100 but I can't pay. So I'll give you $50 if you agree to forget about the other $50

d. I promise to clean your house

4. 'Past consideration' is:

Select one:

a. The same as future consideration

b. Good consideration

c. A concept which was overruled in the case of Roscorla v Thomas

d. No consideration at all

5. Consideration can be present or

Select one:

a.Now

b.Past

c.Forever

d.Future

6. In Je Maintiendrai Pty Ltd v Quaglia, the court decided that the detriment suffered by the plaintiff was:

Select one:

a. Having to pay an amount owing in a lump sum rather than in instalments

b. Having incurred to cost of demolishing the shopping centre

c. Having to engage another builder to complete the work

d. That the contract to purchase the property had been terminated

7. Which of the following statements is true?

Select one:

a. In commercial agreements a court will presume that the parties do not intend to be legally bound to their agreement

b. The case of Rose and Frank Co v J R Crompton & Bros Ltd was decided on the legal issue of privity

c. The case of Rose and Frank Co v J R Crompton & Bros Ltd is best known for the statements the court makes in relation to the legal issue of consideration

d. In commercial agreements a court will presume that the parties do intend to be legally bound to their agreement

8. A person who is already obliged to perform an existing act or duty is sufficient consideration

Select one:

a. If they sign a new contract

b. If it is a commercial agreement

c. If it confers a practical benefit

d. If the payment is by cash

9. Which one of the following cases deals with promissory estoppel?

Select one:

a. Waltons Stores (Interstate) Ltd v Maher

b. Wigan v Edwards

c. Plastyne Products Pty Ltd v Gall Engineering Co Pty Ltd

d. Roscorla v Thomas

10. A contract is formed once the offer is accepted

Select one:

a. True

b. False

11. Which one of the following is NOT true?

Select one:

a. Promissory estoppel may be relevant where no consideration exists, particularly in the context of renegotiated agreements

b. Promissory estoppel is only relevant where a contract exists

c. Promissory estoppel may be relevant where the formalities of making a contract have not been satisfied

d. Promissory estoppel is not part of the law of contract, but performs a complementary function

12. Consideration is NOT required in

Select one:

a. All contracts

b. Simple contracts

c. Social contracts

d. Deeds

13. Which one of the following is NOT good consideration for a promise to sell a car?

Select one:

a. A bottle of soft drink

b. Love and affection

c. The promise not to sue in relation to another matter

d. A promise to pay $500

14. In the case of Todd v Nicol:

Select one:

a. The rebuttable presumption that family members don't intend agreements to be legally binding

b. Is a case dealing with promissory estoppel

c. The court held that this agreement was enforceable as it was a commercial arrangement

d. The court held there was no contract as the dispute was over a family agreement

15. The key principle from the case of Balfour v Balfour is:

Select one:

a. That courts presume that advertisements are invitations to treat

b. That courts presume intention is present in social/domestic agreements

c. That courts presume that advertisements are offers

d. That courts presume that there is a lack of intention in social/domestic agreements

16. Alice agrees to buy John's truck for $50,000. After the sale contract is signed but before Alice hands over the money to John, Alice notices some spots on the side of the truck. She asks John for an assurance that there is no rust on the truck. John promises Alice there is no rust. Later Alice discovers there is a lot of rust in the truck and wants to sue John for breach of contract. Select the best response.

Select one:

a. Alice can sue John because the statement made was clear and equivocal

b.The original contract was concluded, and there was no consideration from Alice to John to create a binding contract for John's promise about the rust

c. Alice can sue John for damages but not terminate the contract because the statement was only verbal

d.This situation is similar to Masters v Cameron, as the contract had not been concluded when the statement was made.

17. Andre owes Brendan $180. Brendan is offered $100 by Andre as full and final settlement. Brendan accepts this offer. Which one of the following is most correct?

Select one:

a. Brendan has a legal right to the additional $80, despite the promise to accept a lower amount

b. This situation is very similar to the facts in Balfour v Balfour

c. Brendan is absolutely precluded from suing Andre for the additional $80 if he accepts $100

d. Andre does not have to return the additional $80 without additional consideration being provided by Brendan

18. Mary tells Naomi that she will repair her car and in return Naomi is to pay Olivia $1500. Mary repairs the car, but Naomi now refuses to pay Olivia.

Select one:

a. Mary can sue Olivia for a breach of contract

b. Olivia cannot take action to enforce the contract

c. Olivia can sue Mary for a breach of contract

d. Olivia can sue Naomi for a breach of contract

19. Ahmed and Zach are best friends. Ahmed says to Zach 'If we go to the movies today, I will buy the tickets if you buy the refreshments'. A court:

Select one:

a. Will presume that Ahmed and Zach are minors

b. Will presume that the agreement has intention

c. Will presume that the agreement lacks intention

d. Will presume that Ahmed and Zach are mentally ill

20. The Centennial Apartments catch fire. Irene Idiot hears her fire alarm go off and rushes out of the building. Sadly, she has left her baby, Iggy Idiot, inside. Fireman Frank rushes to the scene, and Ned Neighbor watches the action from across the street. Irene yells, "I'll give $500 to anyone who saves my baby." If Fireman Frank rescues the baby, can he compel Irene to pay him the $500 reward?

Select one:

a. Yes, because there was intention to contract

b. No, because he had a preexisting duty

c. No, because the promise was illusory

d. No, because he cannot enforce a promise based on past consideration

21. MMC Ltd manufactured custom built industrial machinery. AAC Pty Ltd asked MMC to design and build a machine. AAC was provided contracts by MMC, but did not sign the contracts. MMC asked AAC about the contracts and was told they were being signed, there were no problems and that they wanted the machine quickly. MMC commenced working on the machinery design, including spending $12,000 on design consultancy fees.

AAC then told MMC they no longer wanted the machine.

Can MMC sue AAC?

Select one:

a. No because the contract is not signed

b. No because AAC did not provide consideration

c. Yes, a promise was made by AAC and MMC relied on this promise which caused them to suffer a loss.

d. Yes because the agreement is commercial

22. Frank has a long-term contract to wash trucks for the City of Monash. After a year, soap prices increase, making Frank's prices increase by 5%. He informs the City that he will stop washing trucks unless they agree to pay him an extra 5%. The City agrees. Is this modification valid?

Select one:

a. No, because a contract can never be modified without new consideration

b. Yes, because there was no coercion

c. No, because Frank had a preexisting duty to wash the cars

d. Yes, because the price increase was unforeseen

23. Jens owes JC Builders $5000. On discovering that JC Builders are in financial difficulty Jens offers to pay them $3,000 in full settlement of the debt. JC Builders agree to accept the $3,000 but a week later, claim the remaining $2,000. Will JC Builders succeed in their claim?

Select one:

a. No, because the doctrine of promissory estoppel would apply.

b. Yes, but only if JC Builders agree to carry out further work for the $2,000

c. No, because Jens' payment is in full settlement of the debt.

d. Yes, a promise to accept payment of a smaller sum of money than owed is not enforceable because the consideration is past

24. Aunt Annette and Nephew Ned both live in Louisiana where the drinking age is 18. Annette is concerned that Ned, who is 19, will get into trouble if he drinks while he is still a young man. She offers to pay him $1,000 if he will promise not to drink until he is 21. Ned agrees, and abstains from drinking until his 21st birthday, when he downs 11 "tequila fanny-bangers" at a local bar. After he sobers up, can he force his aunt to pay him the $1000?

Select one:

a. No, because he gave no legal consideration.

b. No, because he violated the spirit of the agreement by getting drunk on his 21st birthday

c. Yes, because he committed a legal act that is valid consideration

d. Yes, because his forbearance constitutes valid consideration

25. Steve sells Bruno a car. After they agreed on the deal, but before the money was handed over, Bruno asks Steve is the car has any oil leaks, Steve says it does not. The car did have leaks and Bruno wants to sue Steve. Which one of the following cases would best apply to this situation:

Select one:

a. Rose and Frank Co v J R Crompton & Bros Ltd

b. Roscorla v Thomas

c. Wigan v Edwards

d. Waltons Stores (Interstate) Ltd v Maher

Explanation not required, thank you