Business Law Assignment 1

  • Uncategorized

BUSINESS LAW 12

BusinessLaw Assignment 1

Assignment1

Question1

Acontract refers to an agreement that is legally abiding and valid. Itis usually between two entities for instance, an agreement amid abuyer and seller. In the scenario, Jane and Laura are the buyerswhile Stan is the seller. For a contract to be valid, it must haveall the necessary elements (Boundy, 2010). The first element of acontract is the intention to create a legal relation. This impliesthat both the seller and the buyer must be willing to sign a contractthat is legally abiding. Thus, due to signing the agreement, theseparties will be able to use signed documents to sue each other incase one party defaults to fulfill the contractual obligations.However, this presumption can be ignored if the buyer and seller saythat they are not willing to sign an abiding contract (Boundy, 2010). In the contract, there is the intention to create a legal relation.This is evident when Laura and Jane visit a local car dealer wherethey settled on the blue 4-door sedan after test driving severalcars. They even gave Stan 100 US dollars so that they could hold thecar for a day.

Thesecond element of a contract is an offer. The offer shows thepreparedness to fulfill something, which when acceptedunconditionally by another party, may result in a legal contract(Stim, 2011). However, offers usually have a specified period of timeafter which they can be revoked. There is an offer in this situationbecause Stan, the salesperson, is offering the car for sale to Janeand Laura. Also, there is time limit for the offer since Jane andLaura have one day to either accept the car or reject it.

Thethird element is acceptance. A legal contract can only exist when thebuyer accepts a deal from the seller. An offer can be accepted eitherby a word of mouth or signing of legal documents (Boundy, 2010). Inthe agreement, Jane and Laura are the determinant of whether acontract will exist or not by either accepting the deal or rejectingit.

Theforth element of a contract is the consideration about the potentialbenefits that will accrue to both the buyer and seller (Stim, 2011).The likely benefits are usually quantified in economic terms.However, there is no legally specified amount of benefit that eachparty should get, thus none of the parties can go to court to sue theother in case the gains are below the market price. Jane and Laurahave the opinion that the car they are using is old and frequentlyhaving mechanical problems therefore, incurring expenses now andthen. With such considerations, they see the option of a new carbeing cheap to maintain which prompts them to get into a deal withStan. On the other hand, Stan will benefit from the profits after thesale of the car.

Thefifth element of a contract is the capacity. In this case, capacityrefers to the ability of both the buyer and seller to create a pact.There are groups of individuals who do not have the ability to make acontract such as persons under the age of 18 years and people who arementally challenged. However, there are times when capacity isoverlooked, especially when selling basic items such as food andclothing (Stim, 2011). In the pact, all the involved parties have thecapacity to sign a deal since they have sound mind.

Question2

Alegal contract exists when all the elements are present (Boundy,2010). Since the elements of the intention to create a legalrelation, presence of an offer, acceptance, consideration, andcapacity are present in the pact, a contract to purchase theautomobile exists. In case one or more elements were missing in thecase, then the deal would have been considered void.

Question3

Thefirst fact that clearly indicates that there is a contract betweenthe three is that Jane and Laura voluntarily went to the local cardealer to look for a car which they can buy to replace their old one.This shows their intention to get into a legal contract. The secondtruth is the presence of an offer. After Jane and Laura made adeposit of 100 US dollars, Stan offered them the 4- door blue sedanfor one day. The third reality that shows there is a contract in thecase is the acceptance from both parties. After the deposit was made,Stan agreed to offer the 4- door blue sedan to Jane and Laura. Also,when Jane and Laura decided to give a deposit and agreed to take thecar that was the moment they consented to the terms of the contractwhether knowingly or unknowingly.

Also,the considerations that were made by Jane and Laura made thisscenario a contract. In a contract, parties make the necessaryconsiderations about the likely profitability of commitment to thecontract. They considered that if they bought a new car, it would beeasier for them to go to school and work. Also, Stan made aconsideration by accepting the 100 US dollars deposit andconvincingly told Jane and Laura that the deposit was refundable.

Goingby the fact that all the three parties involved in the contract hadsound minds, this indicates that all the three had the ability tomake a legal contract. With the assumptions that Jane and Laura areover 18 years, then the decision to replace their old car was in fullcapacity to create a contract. Therefore, it can be concluded that acontract exists since all the elements that make a legal contract arepresent. Since a legal contract exists, there is a contract topurchase a vehicle.

References

Boundy,C. (2010). Businesscontracts handbook.Farnham, Surrey, England: Gower Pub.

Stim,R. (2011). Contracts:The essential business desk reference.Berkeley, CA: Nolo.

Assignment2

BusinessLaw Assignment 2

Question1: The legal rights and responsibilities of the tenant and thelandlord

Rightsand duties of tenant

Tenantsare usually entitled to have the right to private as well as apeaceful possession of the place that they have rented. This meansthat the landlords are not allowed to enter the premises anyhow. Incase there are repairs to be made, then the owner is supposed tonotify the tenant in advance. However, if there is an emergency, thenthe notice might be waived (Brennan, 2013).

Also,residents have a right to occupy a building that is fit for humansettlement. The house that is being rented is supposed to bestructurally fit in order to avoid loss of lives emanating fromcollapsing buildings. Tenants should ensure that the houses that theyoccupy have enough security as well as functioning doors and windows(Portman &amp Stewart, 2015).

Furthermore,tenants have the responsibility to pay rent in time. This impliesthat renters can be evicted if they do not pay the rent in time orfail to submit in full amount. Moreover, they have a duty to ensurethat the places that they rent are kept tidy and avoid any damagessuch as interference with the plumbing. However, they have a right towithhold rent in case the landlord fails to fix a problem in thehouse that he or she has rent out. Nevertheless, before they refuseto give the rent, they are supposed to give written notice to thelandlord within seven days (Brennan, 2013). If the seven days areover, and the proprietor has not yet fixed the problem, then theoccupant should seek permission from the court to use part of therent in fixing the problem in the house. In addition, they have aright to move out in case the landlord does not accomplish coreduties.

Incase the landlord goes against the tenancy agreement, the tenant isfree to move out. If the renter had given the owner some deposit,then the amount must be returned in full amount after 15 daysfollowing the occupant moving out. When the deposit is not returnedin full amount, the renter has a right to object in writing(Jennings, 2011).

Rentershave a right to be informed by the landlord in case the owner thinksthat the occupant has violated the rent agreement. The proprietor issupposed to inform the tenant using a written note and give him/hersome time to rectify the issue. Besides, the owner is supposed toprove beyond any reasonable doubt that the renter has violatedcertain rules and should be evicted. The tenant can be evicted onlyif the landlord had a court order to do so and had sent a notice tothe occupant (Portman &amp Stewart, 2015).

Also,tenants have a responsibility to use the premises that they rent forresidential functions only, and not for commercial functions.Moreover, they are expected to notify the proprietor immediately ifthere are refurbishments to be done (Brennan, 2013). At the end ofthe tenancy, the residents are expected to leave the premises as itwas when renting out. They must also clear all the rubbish beforehanding over the dwelling and ensure that the house is left clean.Finally, keys should be given back to the owner.

Rightsand Responsibilities of the Landlord

Landlordsare expected to provide houses that are safe for human occupation. Itis also their liability to ensure that all maintenance and repairsare done in time. House owners are expected to comply with thesafety, building, and health measures that are set by the governmentto ensure that the tenants stay in a safe place.

Houseowners should inform the tenants when the premise is on sale so thatthe tenants can prepare in advance and avoid any frustration that mayarise when tenants get expelled from the premises without notice.Besides, landlords have a right to get rent from the tenant for usingtheir premises. Also, landlords have a right to receive back theirproperties in good condition.

Question2

Boththe house owner and the tenant have the duty to mitigate damages.Larry, the landlord, was supposed to act immediately when Rogernotified him that the house was leaking. It is the sense of duty ofevery property owner to ensure the premises that they rent out are ingood condition and safety has to be maintained. On the other hand,Roger should have withheld the rent and sought a court order to usepart of the rent to repair the leaking roof since this is allowed bylaw (Jennings, 2011). If Roger did this, further damages such as thedestruction of the drywall and the electrical socket would have beenavoided. Besides, tenants are supposed to ensure that they take goodcare of the premises that they lease (Brennan, 2013). Therefore,Roger was wrong when he destroyed the drywall and electrical socket.

Question3

Larrydoes not have any legal backgrounds to evict Roger since he destroyedthe wall emanating from anger that resulted from Larry’s ignoranceto repair the leaking roof. Instead, Larry should compensate Rogerfor his destroyed furniture.

Question4

Rogerhas a legal commitment to pay for the damages that he caused sincedestroying the drywall was not the best way to resolve the issue ofthe leaking roof. Roger could have sought permission from a court tobe allowed to use part of the rent to repair the roof. On the otherhand, Larry is liable for direct damage, especially the destructionof Roger’s furniture. If Larry acted promptly to repair the leakingroof, Roger’s furniture could not have been destroyed.

References

Brennan,G. (2013). Landlordand tenant law.Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Jennings,M. (2011). Realestate law.Mason, Ohio: South-Western Cengage Learning.

Portman,J. &amp Stewart, M. (2015). Renters`rights: The basics.Berkeley, California: Nolo.

Close Menu