(Topic relating to Vitiating Factors - Contract & Agency Law)

Julie, aged 17, is passionate about acting. She aspires to be a leading actress in local TV dramas in a few years' time. She lives with her parents and her two sisters in a 3-room HDB flat.

Julie decided to participate in a 10-month workshop for acting skills. This workshop was run by E-Acting, a company that was set up by Elvira, a former TV actress. She had to sign a contract and pay the full amount of course fees of $50,000 upfront.

Under Clause 5 of the contract, she was not allowed to take on any part-time or full-time job. Instead, she has been spending her time attending the full-day workshop sessions. She is short of money and asked Tina, her colleague, for a loan. Tina reluctantly agreed, after obtaining assurances from Julie that the monies was for "important things like food and transport".

During the weekends, she worked long hours as an "assistant" to Elvira who had verbally agreed to pay her S$3 per hour. Her work included preparing documents for the various departments of E-Acting, making reservations for Elvira etc.

Krazee Productions had approached Julie recently and offered her a small role in their upcoming movie. Elvira pointed to Clause 5 of the contract and refused to let Julie accept Krazee Production's offer.

(a) Explain to Julie whether (and if yes, why) she is bound by the terms in the workshop contract with E-Acting.

(b) Discuss whether the loan by Tina is enforceable against Julie.