Test

Question 1(1 point)

Saved

Listen

ReadSpeaker webReader: Listen

Focus

What is the policy rationale for contractual quantum meruit?

Question 1 options:

1)

The assistance provided by implied terms is uncertain.

2)

It is not the intention of the parties that goods or services are provided for free.

3)

Parties who fail to document their contracts should be bound by their promises.

4)

The parties' intention to impose a penalty should be upheld.

Question 2(1 point)

Listen

ReadSpeaker webReader: Listen

What is the legal term given to a provision in a contract whereby the parties agree in advance the amount to be paid in the event of a contract breach?

Question 2 options:

1)

an implied term

2)

a liquidated damages clause

3)

a condition precedent

4)

an exemption clause

Question 3(1 point)

Listen

ReadSpeaker webReader: Listen

Marty has made his acceptance of an offer to purchase his house subject to him being approved for a mortgage with a five-year term, a principal sum of $400,000 and an interest rate of no more than 3.5% per annum. Why did Marty's realtor advise him to do so?

Question 3 options:

1)

so that if Marty does not qualify for the mortgage he needs, he does not have to buy the house and he can't be successfully sued by the vendor.

2)

to ensure that there is a valid contract.

3)

to ensure that Marty will pay a fair price.

4)

to prove intention to contract.

Question 4(1 point)

Listen

ReadSpeaker webReader: Listen

What is the legal effect of a condition precedent?

Question 4 options:

1)

It prevents a contract from being created if a particular condition is not met.

2)

It relieves a party from performing a contract if a particular condition is not met before the date the contract was supposed to start.

3)

It is a term that, if breached, entitles the other party to cancel the contract.

4)

It permits a party to limit liability for damages.

5)

If there is a dispute between the parties, it ensures that oral terms of the contract are given effect.

Question 5(1 point)

Listen

ReadSpeaker webReader: Listen

What is the legal term given to a clause that makes a contract enforceable against a buyer only if the buyer is able to secure a building inspection satisfactory to the buyer?

Question 5 options:

1)

a liquidated damages clause

2)

a limitation of liability clause

3)

a condition subsequent

4)

a condition precedent

Question 6(1 point)

Listen

ReadSpeaker webReader: Listen

Martin has agreed to sell his car to his son for $500. What is the legal effect of this promise?

Question 6 options:

1)

The law presumes promises between family members are non-contractual.

2)

The law presumes all promises between family members are gratuitous.

3)

It is meaningless unless Martin goes to a lawyer and has a contract prepared by the lawyer.

4)

The family members must understand the legal consequences of a promise.

Question 7(1 point)

Listen

ReadSpeaker webReader: Listen

A construction company and a building supply company have a contract which states that should a party breach the contract, the party in breach will pay the innocent party the sum of $1000 per day for up to 10 days, or as long as the breach continues, whichever is less. This is an example of

Question 7 options:

1)

a condition precedent

2)

a condition subsequent

3)

an exemption clause

4)

a limitation of liability clause

5)

a liquidated damages clause

6)

none of the above

Question 8(1 point)

Listen

ReadSpeaker webReader: Listen

A drunk customer is ejected from a hockey game five minutes into the first period. When the customer demands their money back, they are shown a paragraph on the ticket that sets out their contract. The ticket states. "Management reserves the right to eject patrons for intoxication. No refunds." This clause is

Question 8 options:

1)

a condition precedent

2)

a condition subsequent

3)

an exemption clause

4)

none of the above

Question 9(1 point)

Listen

ReadSpeaker webReader: Listen

A customer agrees to go ziplining, pays, goes through the safety orientation and then, just before ziplining, the customer is required to sign a written contract. The zipline harness is faulty and the customer gets whiplash. The customer is surprised when the company points out a tiny clause buried in the contract, stating that that the zipline company is not liable for personal injuries or death. Which of the following is correct?

Question 9 options:

1)

The exemption clause applies because it is in writing; the customer cannot sue

2)

The exemption clause does not apply because the contract was created at the time the customer paid and the exemption clause was not part of the contract at the time the contract was created; the customer can sue

3)

The exemption clause applies because this is a business situation and the parties had an intention to create legal relations; the customer cannot sue

4)

the exemption clause does not apply because there was no intention to contract between the customer and the zipline company; the customer can sue

Question 10(1 point)

Listen

ReadSpeaker webReader: Listen

Starting next month, Autumn and Layla have agreed that Autumn will attend Layla's home and provide her with math tutoring for three hours per week for a flat fee of $100. What is the legal term for Layla's promise to pay Autumn $100 each week?

Question 10 options:

1)

gratuitous promise

2)

past consideration

3)

ratification

4)

consideration

5)

quantum meruit

Question 11(1 point)

Listen

ReadSpeaker webReader: Listen

What is the legal effect of placing a seal on a contract?

Question 11 options:

1)

The party applying the seal is "estopped" from breaching the contract.

2)

The promise in the contract will be enforceable even if it is gratuitous.

3)

The application of a seal is ceremonial and has no legal implications.

4)

The seal replaces the party's name in the contract.

Question 12(1 point)

Listen

ReadSpeaker webReader: Listen

Colton Steel Inc. agreed to supply 500 tons of steel rebar to Coren Contracting Inc. for a price of $250 per ton. Shortly after the contract came into effect, the market price of rebar rose to $275 per ton so Colton asked for more money. Fortunately, Coren Contracting Inc. was agreeable to paying the new higher price. Why might Coren Contracting Inc's promise to pay an additional $25 per ton be unenforceable?

Question 12 options:

1)

the lack of sufficient consideration

2)

the absence of fresh consideration

3)

the lack of adequate consideration

4)

the absence of consensus

Question 13(1 point)

Listen

ReadSpeaker webReader: Listen

In the pandemic, Mabel has started making masks and she is doing well with her new business. Though it is pricier than she is used to paying, she agrees to buy some fabric with great designs from an Ontario manufacturer. When shopping at a local fabric outlet, she sees the same fabric she just ordered from Ontario, for much less. Which of the following is accurate?

Question 13 options:

1)

Due to quantum meruit, Mabel can cancel her contract with the Ontario manufacturer.

2)

Since consideration must be adequate, Mabel can cancel her contract with the Ontario manufacturer.

3)

Due to quantum meruit, Mabel cannot cancel her contract with the Ontario manufacturer.

4)

Since consideration does not have to be adequate, Mabel cannot cancel her contract with the Ontario manufacturer.

Question 14(2 points)

Listen

ReadSpeaker webReader: Listen

Which of the following are true about intention to contract?

Question 14 options:

1)

due to the intention requirement in contracts, you can't have a legal contract with close family, like your mom

2)

in a lawsuit between friends, the person who wants to claim there is a contract must prove, on a balance of probabilities, that the parties were serious and intended to create legal relations

3)

in a lawsuit between family members, the person who wants to claim there is no contract must prove, on a balance of probabilities, that the parties were not serious and did not intend to create legal relations

4)

in a lawsuit between strangers at a garage sale, the person who wants to claim there is a contract must prove, on a balance of probabilities, that the parties were serious and intended to create legal relations