Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
In-Class Exercise
on Lecture Topics 1 and 2
Major Assignment
Available from Monday 29 August
On Moodle
Due 5pm, Tuesday 4 October (Wk 10)
Discussion Forum
Available from this week
One per tutorial group
For students to use to collaborate with their tutorial
group as they wish (voluntary)
Tutors will provide details about how to use the
Discussion Forum for your tutorial class
NO MARKS attached to this but a very useful
collaboration tool
Discussion Forum
Students are welcome to attach relevant articles,
media releases, images, videos, podcasts, cases etc
to their postings, if they wish
Students are especially encouraged to read and
to comment on the work of their peers
Be respectful and sensible about what you post
Your Tutors
NOTE: YOUR TUTORS ARE YOUR PRIMARY
POINT OF CONTACT
Make the most of your tutor!
Work closely with your tutor and communicate
with your tutor
Tutors will let you know details of their face-to-face
consultation times : see information in the Tutorial
Program
All queries should go to your tutor in the first
instance
Your tutor will let you know if your query needs to
be referred to LiC or to the administrative team
6
Tutorial Attendance
Reminder: you can only attend the tutorial you
are enrolled in!
Tutors will refuse your attendance in a class where
you are not on the roll, unless prior arrangements
have been made (eg: due to illness, unavoidable
absence because of a job interview etc)
Remember there is an 80% attendance
requirementdont miss your tutorials!
Lecture 3: Summary
Essential elements of a contract:
Agreement
Offer
Acceptance
Lecture 3: Summary
Other elements for a valid contract:
Legal capacity
Genuine consent
Legality of purpose
Any formal/procedural requirements must be satisfied
Lecture 3: Summary
Essential elements of contract
1. The Offer
Intention/willingness to be bound (Clarke v Earl of
Dunraven)
Firm promise (Azzi v Volvo Car Australia)
Communication: Notice of Offer (Carlill v Carbolic
Smoke Ball)
Revocation of offer to occur before acceptance
(Dickinson v Dodds)
10
Lecture 3: Summary
What is NOT an offer:
Invitation to treat (Pharmaceutical Society of
Great Britain v Boots): offer to make an offer
Counter-Offers (Hyde v Wrench)
Requests for Information (Harvey v Facey)
11
Lecture 3: Summary
2. The Acceptance
Must be in response to Offer (R v Clarke)
Communicated (But: silence is generally not
acceptance Felthouse v Bindley)
Absolute, unqualified (Ebenezer Mining Co)
Postal Rule/Instantaneous communications
12
Lecture 3: Summary
Consideration: what is it?
Essential to validity of contract
Something for something
Concept of VALUE
BUT can be broader than just price
Can include acts, promises etc
13
Lecture 3: Summary
Consideration: what is it?
It is what the promisor gives in exchange for the
return promise or the return action from the promisee
Consideration turns an agreement into a contract
Failure of consideration can make an agreement
unenforceable
14
Lecture 3: Summary
Rules for Consideration
1.
15
Lecture 3: Summary
Rules for Consideration
2. Consideration must not be past
Past consideration:
occurs where a promise is given after an act has
been performed
is generally not enforceable
16
Lecture 3: Summary
Rules for Consideration
BUT: past consideration can be good consideration
IF:
the act was done at the promisors request
the parties understood that the act would be
remunerated
the promise would have been enforceable if it had
been promised in advance of the act
Lampleigh v Braithwait
17
Lecture 3: Summary
Rules for Consideration
Therefore:
Consideration must be
Present (executed) consideration which is an act
done now in return for a promise when the act is
completed
Future (executory) consideration where the
parties agree to exchange promises to do
something in the future
Gibson & Fraser, at pp 188 to 189
18
Lecture 3: Summary
Rules for Consideration
3. Consideration must move between the parties to
the contract (ie: from promisee, the person to
whom the promise is made)
Dunlop Pneumatic Tyres v Selfridge & Co
A B
BC
(ASK: Why cant A sue C?)
Coulls v Bagott
A B+C
19
Lecture 3: Summary
Rules for Consideration
4. Consideration must have value but need not be
adequate
Consideration must have value but need not be
adequate as this is something only the parties to
the contract can decide
Chappell & Co Ltd v Nestle Co Ltd
20
Lecture 3: Summary
Rules for Consideration
5. Consideration must be more than promise to carry
out an existing duty (see slides on Insufficient
Consideration)
6. Consideration must be definite
7. Consideration must be legal
8. Consideration must be referable to the other
partys promise cannot claim benefit of contract if
no consideration provided for promise (see also
Dunlop Pneumatic Tyres case and Coulls v Bagott)
21
Lecture 3: Summary
Rules for Consideration
9. Practical benefit can be good consideration
.BUTsee next slide!
Williams v Roffey Bros & Nicholls (Contractors) Ltd
22
Todays lecture
Insufficient Consideration
Doctrine of Promissory Estoppel
Intention to enter into legal relations
Terms of a contract
Representation vs terms
Parol evidence rule
Express vs implied terms
Collateral contracts
Conditions and warranties
Uncertain terms
Meaningless terms
Ambiguous terms
23
Overview - Lecture 4
Terms of a Contract
On completion of this lecture you should be able to:
Explain what is meant by promissory estoppel
Clarify the roles of intention in contract law
Set out the legal requirements for a valid contract
Clarify the role of intention in contract law
Explain the difference between terms and
representations
Explain what is a collateral contract
Identify different types of terms (condition, warranty
etc)
24
Insufficient Consideration
1.
Insufficient Consideration
2.
26
Insufficient Consideration
3. Moral obligations, natural love and affection will
NOT convert a promise into good consideration:
Eastwood v Kenyon
See Gibson & Fraser, at p 198
27
28
Promissory estoppel
Cases:
Central London Property Trust Ltd v High Trees
House Ltd
Waltons Stores (Interstate) Ltd v Maher
See Gibson & Fraser, at pp 199 to 202
29
Promissory estoppel
Brennan Js (Waltons v Maher) six-point test for when
the promisor cannot go back on his/her word:
Promisee (Maher) assumes existence of particular legal
relationship
Promisor (Waltons) responsible for this assumption
Promisee acted/did not act in reliance on that assumption
Promisor knew what promisee intended for promisee to act in
this way
Promisee will suffer loss or detriment or harm if the
assumption/expectation is not fulfilled
Promisor did not take any steps to warn promisee s/he may not
fulfil expectation etc and unconscionability would arise if
Promisor allowed to go back on promise.
See Gibson & Fraser, at pp 201 to 202
30
Promissory estoppel
Additional cases to read/research:
Commonwealth of Australia v Verwayen
Giumelli v Giumelli
See Gibson & Fraser, at p 202
31
32
Subject to contract
Expressly NO intention
Subject to contract clauses
Document not in its final form
Subject to preparation of written document
See Gibson & Fraser, at pp 166 to 167
33
Presumed intention
The courts have to determine objectively whether the
parties intended the agreement to be legally
enforceable
To assist, traditionally agreements are divided into
consider two categories:
Social, family, domestic, voluntary
Commercial or business
Presumptions about intention are applied to each
34
Presumed intention
Traditionally:
Social, family, domestic, voluntary (ie between
friends, family members or where services
volunteered)
PRESUMED NO INTENTION
Commercial or business
PRESUMED INTENTION TO BE BOUND
35
Presumed intention
Traditionally:
Relevant presumption applied
Presumption could be rebutted by evidence
evidence
Party without benefit of presumption (eg
defendant in commercial agreement) bears
onus of rebutting it
36
Intention
Presumptions now abolished
Traditional approach no longer apply
Better approach: situation will DEPEND ON THE
FACTS OF A CASE (BUTcourts will use
presumptions as tool to help form conclusions)
Case:
Ermogenous v Greek Orthodox Community of SA
Inc: wrong to formulate prescriptive rules
concerning intention
See Gibson & Fraser, at pp 169 to 172
37
38
39
40
Intention:
Domestic/Social or Voluntary Relationships
Matters to consider:
Status of parties:
Type of relationship and degree of closenes
Nature of relationship at time of agreement
Whether there is agreement/consensus between
parties and extent to which is defined as DEFINITIVE
Subject matter/topic and how agreement came to be
41
Intention:
Domestic/Social or Voluntary Relationships
Matters to consider (Continued):
Seriousness of conduct (eg: relocating overseas/transfer of
property?)
Any expenses of inconvenience or substantial detriment
involved?
Was litigation for non-performance contemplated?
Was agreement formal or informal (eg: was it reduced to
writing?)
Case: Ermogenous v Greek Orthodox Community of SA Inc
See Gibson & Fraser, at pp 170 AND 178
42
Intention: Commercial/Business
Assumption parties intended to create legal
contractual relations
BUT considered on a case by case basis
Cases:
Banque Brussels Lambert SA v Australian
National Industries Ltd
Kleinwort Benson Ltd v Malaysian Mining
Corporation Bhd
(Compare the two decisions)
See Gibson & Fraser, at p 181
43
The contract
What have the parties agreed to?
What is the extent of the rights and
obligations that the parties have entered into?
The answer is found in the contents of the
contract
44
Contents of a contract
Contents of a contract can be classified into
two categories:
(1) a representation:
non-contractual statement
made pre-contract during negotiations
not intended to be legally binding
if false, it is a misrepresentation
(2) a term:
contractual statement
intended to be legally binding
breach of term gives rise to action for breach of
contract
45
Representations
Importance of truth of the representation
Reliance of innocent party on representation
Time period between representation and final
agreement
Intention behind making of representation
Omission of representation from contract
Consider any special knowledge or skills of
person who made representation
46
Representation
Cases:
Oscar Chess Ltd v Williams
Bentley (Dick) Productions Ltd v Harold Smith
(Motors) Ltd
(Compare these two decisions: see also next slide)
See Gibson & Fraser, at pp 276 to 277
47
Representation
Objective tests:
How much time has lapsed between making of
statement/representation and final agreement
Was the innocent party asked to check or verify the
statement/representation?
Was the statement/representation made with intention
of precenting other party from finding any defects (and
did it succeed?
What importance did the parties attach to the
statement/representation?
See Gibson & Fraser, at pp 275 to 277
48
Representation
ASK:
Is it a statement of fact?
Did it induce the offeree to enter into the
contract?
See Gibson & Fraser, at p 275
49
Representations and
the parol evidence rule
Parol = oral, spoken
If a contract is in writing and if the writing appears to
contain the whole contract, it is presumed that the
writing contains all of the terms of the contract
50
Representations
and the parol evidence rule
Courts are generally reluctant to admit evidence of
words, acts or representations made prior to the
execution of the contract that might add to, vary or
contradict the written contract
51
52
Implied Terms
For terms to be implied into a contract, they must:
be reasonable and equitable
be necessary to give business efficacy
be so obvious it goes without saying
be capable of clear expression
not contradict an express term of the contract
See Gibson & Fraser, at pp 288 to 289 (esp Table at p 288)
54
55
Types of terms
1. Condition
2. Warranty
Condition or Warranty
Cases:
Bettini v Gye
Poussard v Spiers
(Compare these two decisions)
See Gibson & Fraser, at pp 284 to 285
57
Uncertain terms
If there have been prior dealings, courts may imply
appropriate terms
Where there are no past dealings, courts may be
forced to find contract void for uncertainty
58
Meaningless terms
If the term has no meaning, the courts will sever it if
possible and leave the rest of the contract valid
If this is not possible, the contract will be void for
uncertainty
59
Ambiguous terms
If a term has more than one meaning, the contract
will not necessarily be void for uncertainty, so long as
the term can be given a meaning
60
63
64
65
Next lecture
Exclusion Clauses
Collateral contracts
Changing terms of a contract
Capacity
Privity
Agency
Vitiating elements (eg mistake, misrepresentation,
unconscionable conduct etc)
Exclusion Clauses
To be discussed in week 5
Limitation of liability clauses
One of the Assignment questions
Reading:
Gibson & Fraser, at pp 292 to 302 and pp 305
to 306
DO NOT READ materials on pp 302 and 303
regarding Australian Consumer Law we will
study this in week 7)
67