Grocery Incorporated

Essay by paper10University, Bachelor'sA-, January 2010

download word file, 6 pages 0.0

Downloaded 978 times

In scenario number one, Grocery who is the client in need of a renovation for the store had a contract with masterpiece construction. The store renovation had to be completed within a six month period. Masterpiece Construction did not meet the six-month period as agreed with Grocery in the contract. As a result, masterpiece construction had subcontracted the job to Build Them To Fall in order to complete the rest of the job. In most cases if the contract is not performed by a certain deadline, then a breach of contract has occurred.

However, if a party is not at risk due to the delay of completing a job, then most courts treat this delay as a minor breach, therefore, allowing the other party additional time needed to complete the job. The breaching party is awarded specific performance orders to grant the acts as promised in the contract. All courts award the remedy at their discretion when the subject matter of a contract is unique.

This is a complete performance type of contract, listed on the three type’s performance of a contract (Cheeseman, 2007). Grocery has all the rights for a lawsuit against masterpiece construction because of the breach of contract. Grocery would win the lawsuit not because masterpiece construction had subcontracted to Build Them To Fall, but because the six month contract had lapsed before subcontracting the incomplete job.

In Scenario number two, Jeff Fresh who was a minor of age made a decision to purchase a car from a used car dealership. In this circumstance Jeff Fresh can claim, if indeed he is under the age of 18, that he did not have the contractual capacity to enter into any valid contract with Smooth Sales Used Cars, that the contract was not “supported by legally sufficient consideration” (Cheeseman, 2007). Smooth did not verify the age of Jeff, which constitutes unscrupulous behavior and the courts must protect a minor such as Jeff. According to Cheeseman, both the common law of contracts and many state statutes protect persons who lack contractual capacity from having contracts enforced against them.

It is obvious from the scenario that Jeff has transferred consideration—in this case, a down payment for the car, plus a monthly payment of $200 for six months—to Smooth Sales Used Cars before attempting to void the contract. As a result, Jeff can argue that he must be restored to the same financial position he was in before he entered into the contract.

Smooth Sales Used Cars may try to argue that since Jeff was in possession of the car for six months, a period during which the car has diminished in value as a result of Jeff’s use, that they are owed some equitable remedy. But the law is explicitly clear that a minor cannot enter into a contract, and so there is no legal remedy for Smooth Sales Used Cars in this scenario. Also, the issue of Jeff’s age, if proven that he was a minor at the time the contract was signed, is not a simple case of clerical error. Smooth simply ignored to verify the age of the second party, in this case, Jeff, and so the car company cannot argue for equitable remedy on the basis of reformation.

In scenario number three, Tom Green works as a produce manager for the store in My Town, U. S. A. In addition, Tom Green also works as a model trainer. One day, Tom Green visited with a fellow train hobbyist Harry, and told him that he wanted to sell his trains after his retirement. Then, Tom Green offered this opportunity to Harry telling that he is the only one fellow train hobbyist that he can trust. Meanwhile, Harry looked forward to the day when he could buy his trains. Harry spent a period of two years spending all his savings building a new 2,000 square feet room onto Tom’s house. When Tom retired from his work, he sold the train house to David instead of Harry. Then, Harry sued Tom claiming breach of contract for promissory estoppels. The question is who wins.

Based on the particulars of this incident, Tom wins the case. There are two major reasons that Tom wins the case, and Harry loses the case. First, Harry does not have a written contract with Tom Green that can prove that Tom has made promissory contract to sell his trains to Harry. Statue of fraud requires real estate and a real estate related contract in writing rather than verbally or orally to be enforceable by the courts and the law. Therefore, Harry will lose the case, and Tom Green will win the case. Second, one-year-rule that the statue of fraud requires a contract in writing, if the performance of the contract occurs more than one-year period in order to be enforceable. In his case, Harry has spent the two year of period building a new 2,000 square feet room onto his house. Because of that, Harry will lose the case on a second contractual failure issue.

In scenario number four, commerce and terms of use is at issue when utilizing online services. Most E-commerce websites require its customers to not only read and accept the terms of use but they also have to acknowledge that it is read and understood before a customer can place an order. Most consumers in fact do not read the contract and proceed to order without thinking of possible consequences. Various terms of use contracts vary accordingly. They all seem the same, but each one is unique to the service that it protects and represents. An example of acknowledgement is after reading the terms of use page; a client must check off a button in order to proceed. If they do not acknowledge by checking that box then they are unable to place an order with that company. Grocery, Inc., did state in the contract that sale items would not be sold at the discounted price. If ordered online George does need the sauce for his business and with it being discontinued it could affect his business in the long run.

For George to want to purchase the entire inventory is understandable and the contract does state that products are limited to inventory on hand. The store that he initially ordered from did indeed have ten cases of the sauce. They are obligated to sell the inventory per the contract rules. The only difference would be that George would not get the sale price for these items. George has a valid case since Grocery, Inc. did not cite the contract in this matter. In terms of the grocer not selling the remaining stock to George was against what the contract states regarding inventories. George should be able to buy the remaining stock, but not at the discounted price. The terms of the contract are signed before initial purchase and sale items on the weekly flyer will not be applied to online orders. Once signed it is implied that the customer agrees and will follow the terms of use contract for purchases or online orders.

ConclusionThe four scenarios presented show that operating in the business world can present contractual issues that must be addressed in a proper and legal manor. If a business gets entangled in legal disputes, a well written contract can be the best defense in a court. The more concise a written contract can be worded may lessen the chances for misunderstanding or accusations of questionable business practices. While the presence of a written contract cannot guarantee a business that it will be lawsuit free, a contract can afford a measure of protection in moving forward thru the courts toward settlement or resolution. The courts typically do not try to reason fairness, and courts attempt to address the legality of the issues presented, therefore as a general rule, and a good practice for all business entities should invest in the protections that contractual agreements can afford. As can be seen from the four scenarios presented, the presence or absence of a contract can affect the outcome of a case, re-enforcing contractual agreements as a measure of protection for the business world.

ReferenceHenry R. Cheeseman. (2007). Formation of traditional and online contracts. Prentice Hall, Inc. A Pearson Education Company.