Ask Experts Questions for FREE Help!
  Advanced
Register  |  Log in  
   Ask    
 Answer  
  Help  

Ask QuestionsprogressAnswer QuestionsprogressBuild ReputationprogressBecome an Expert
 
Free Answers in 3 Easy Steps

Register Now
3 Steps

At Ask Me Help Desk you can ask questions in any topic and have them answered for free by our experts. To ask questions or participate in answering them you must register for a free account. By registering you will be able to:
  • Get free answers from experts in any of our 300+ topics.
  • Accept money for answers that you provide.
  • Communicate privately with other members (PM).
  • See fewer ads.

Home > Law > Corporate Law   »   commercial law - the contract law

 
Question Tools Search this Question Display Modes
Question
 
 
#1  
Old May 17, 2007, 08:16 PM
makubexho
New Member
makubexho is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1
makubexho See this member's comment history on his/her Profile page.
commercial law - the contract law

> MB is a bank, had a scheme of financing to construct a traffic tunnel.

in the course of construction of the tunnel.

>SBB, a private busline, came to MB and negotiaged for a contract with MB. one of the clauses in the contract saying that "SBB may drive 100 buses in each direction through the tunnel..." , then the contract signed by both parties.

>1 month after the tunnel constructed, SBB buses could only operate 40 bus journeys through the tunnel as a result of traffic congestion.

Then SBB came to you (as a solicitor) and brought up the conplaint and asked for your advise for the case.

what would u advise SBB as to the clause in the contract?

Reply With Quote
 
     

Answers
 
 
Old May 17, 2007, 08:22 PM   #2  
Auttajasi
Junior Member
Auttajasi is offline
 
Auttajasi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: U.S. Midwest
Posts: 107
Auttajasi See this member's comment history on his/her Profile page.
Are you asking us to do our homework for you? Shame, Shame, Shame.
  Reply With Quote
 
     
 
 
Old Sep 4, 2007, 01:26 AM   #3  
hepzibah
New Member
hepzibah is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 3
hepzibah See this member's comment history on his/her Profile page.
Quote:
Originally Posted by makubexho
> MB is a bank, had a scheme of financing to construct a traffic tunnel.

in the course of construction of the tunnel.

>SBB, a private busline, came to MB and negotiaged for a contract with MB. one of the clauses in the contract saying that "SBB may drive 100 buses in each direction through the tunnel..." , then the contract signed by both parties.

>1 month after the tunnel constructed, SBB buses could only operate 40 bus journeys through the tunnel as a result of traffic congestion.

Then SBB came to you (as a solicitor) and brought up the conplaint and asked for your advise for the case.

what would u advise SBB as to the clause in the contract?
A handshake is a gentlemans agreement and is not actually a written contract.
There could have been a non verbal agreement in the form of a gentlemans agreement that allowed fewer than 100 buses.
Steve
  Reply With Quote
 
     
 
 
Old Sep 4, 2007, 05:09 AM   #4  
excon
Expert
excon is online now
 
excon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: On the outside
Posts: 8,421
excon See this member's comment history on his/her Profile page.excon See this member's comment history on his/her Profile page.excon See this member's comment history on his/her Profile page.excon See this member's comment history on his/her Profile page.excon See this member's comment history on his/her Profile page.excon See this member's comment history on his/her Profile page.excon See this member's comment history on his/her Profile page.excon See this member's comment history on his/her Profile page.
Quote:
Originally Posted by makubexho
"SBB may drive 100 buses in each direction through the tunnel..."
Hello mak:

There's no violation of the contract. The contract uses the word MAY, not MUST.

excon
  Reply With Quote
 
     
 
 
Old Sep 23, 2007, 06:14 PM   #5  
arunkp
New Member
arunkp is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1
arunkp See this member's comment history on his/her Profile page.
Mrs S drives into the entrance of Watson’s multi–story car park at 4.55 pm. She takes a ticket from the dispensing machine. This ticket has printed on it a black metallic strip that records the time, and the legend:

“By accepting this ticket the holder is bound by the terms and conditions of the contract.”

Mrs S enters the car-park. On the first floor she finds a large sign which states the terms of the contract. One of these terms is that any car left after 5 pm. will be charged $50.00 regardless of length of stay. Mrs Smith does not like this idea and attempts to leave the car-park; there is however a line of cars exiting and her departure is delayed by 10 minutes. At the pay kiosk the attendant tries to charge Mrs Smith $50.00 for her stay. Mrs Smith refuses; she claims a contract was not formed.

Could you briefly set out what you would consider Mrs Smith’s legal argument for her claim would be under common law? How would Watson’s Multi-story Car-park attempt to counter this claim?
  Reply With Quote
 
     
 
 
Old May 14, 2008, 03:47 AM   #6  
rina vaghela
New Member
rina vaghela is offline
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1
rina vaghela See this member's comment history on his/her Profile page.
You work as a junior clerk for Ikkelbod, Dwyer & Summ, Accountants. The senior partner of the firm, while conducting an Audit has encountered a difficulty. He places the problem on your desk which he has discovered. He requires you to research this problem and give him your opinion of the legal options available to Mrs Smith which he in turn can then advise the client with.

You are required to provide an essay which covers all of the relevant legal issues and researches the relevant legal precedents. Based on this research an indication is made what may be the most advantageous path for the client to take. All relevant legal information must be provided to the client, to enable them to make an informed choice.

Mrs S drives into the entrance of Watson’s multi–story car park at 4.55 pm. She takes a ticket from the dispensing machine. This ticket has printed on it a black metallic strip that records the time, and the legend:

“By accepting this ticket the holder is bound by the terms and conditions of the contract.”

Mrs S enters the car-park. On the first floor she finds a large sign which states the terms of the contract. One of these terms is that any car left after 5 pm. will be charged $50.00 regardless of length of stay. Mrs Smith does not like this idea and attempts to leave the car-park; there is however a line of cars exiting and her departure is delayed by 10 minutes. At the pay kiosk the attendant tries to charge Mrs Smith $50.00 for her stay. Mrs Smith refuses; she claims a contract was not formed.

Could you set out ( within the required word limit) what you would consider Mrs Smith’s legal argument for her claim would be under common law? How would Watson’s Multi-story Car-park attempt to counter this claim?
  Reply With Quote
 
     
 
 
Old May 14, 2008, 05:44 AM   #7  
JudyKayTee
Expert
JudyKayTee is offline
 
JudyKayTee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: NY State
Posts: 6,662
JudyKayTee See this member's comment history on his/her Profile page.JudyKayTee See this member's comment history on his/her Profile page.JudyKayTee See this member's comment history on his/her Profile page.JudyKayTee See this member's comment history on his/her Profile page.
Quote:
Originally Posted by arunkp
Mrs S drives into the entrance of Watson’s multi–story car park at 4.55 pm. She takes a ticket from the dispensing machine. This ticket has printed on it a black metallic strip that records the time, and the legend:

“By accepting this ticket the holder is bound by the terms and conditions of the contract.”

Mrs S enters the car-park. On the first floor she finds a large sign which states the terms of the contract. One of these terms is that any car left after 5 pm. will be charged $50.00 regardless of length of stay. Mrs Smith does not like this idea and attempts to leave the car-park; there is however a line of cars exiting and her departure is delayed by 10 minutes. At the pay kiosk the attendant tries to charge Mrs Smith $50.00 for her stay. Mrs Smith refuses; she claims a contract was not formed.

Could you briefly set out what you would consider Mrs Smith’s legal argument for her claim would be under common law? How would Watson’s Multi-story Car-park attempt to counter this claim?


First, this should be a new thread.

Second it is the policy of the Board not to do homework.
  Reply With Quote
 
     
 
 
Old May 14, 2008, 05:45 AM   #8  
JudyKayTee
Expert
JudyKayTee is offline
 
JudyKayTee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: NY State
Posts: 6,662
JudyKayTee See this member's comment history on his/her Profile page.JudyKayTee See this member's comment history on his/her Profile page.JudyKayTee See this member's comment history on his/her Profile page.JudyKayTee See this member's comment history on his/her Profile page.
Quote:
Originally Posted by arunkp
Mrs S drives into the entrance of Watson’s multi–story car park at 4.55 pm. She takes a ticket from the dispensing machine. This ticket has printed on it a black metallic strip that records the time, and the legend:

“By accepting this ticket the holder is bound by the terms and conditions of the contract.”

Mrs S enters the car-park. On the first floor she finds a large sign which states the terms of the contract. One of these terms is that any car left after 5 pm. will be charged $50.00 regardless of length of stay. Mrs Smith does not like this idea and attempts to leave the car-park; there is however a line of cars exiting and her departure is delayed by 10 minutes. At the pay kiosk the attendant tries to charge Mrs Smith $50.00 for her stay. Mrs Smith refuses; she claims a contract was not formed.

Could you briefly set out what you would consider Mrs Smith’s legal argument for her claim would be under common law? How would Watson’s Multi-story Car-park attempt to counter this claim?



Looks like Rina Vaghela and OP go to the same school.

Here's a thought - why don't you get together and figure this out - ?
  Reply With Quote
 
     


Question Tools Search this Question
Search this Question:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

 
Similar Sponsors

Similar Questions
Question Asker Topic Answers Last Post
Case Study: Breach of contract jay Corporate Law 4 Dec 26, 2007 10:39 AM
Case Law Examples psailkev Corporate Law 1 Mar 13, 2007 05:54 AM
Commercial Law for business Africa001 Other Law 2 Mar 11, 2007 12:01 PM
contract law Odessa Gatewood Other Law 3 Dec 12, 2006 05:30 AM
contract law ggyuriska Other Law 0 May 9, 2006 08:40 PM




Copyright ©2003 - 2007, Ask Me Help Desk.
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:20 PM.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.0.0 RC6 © 2006, Crawlability, Inc.