Case Study
Just over two years ago, Jane
bought a rundown coffee shop business and the premises at which the business
was carried on. Soon after buying the business and premises, she had the shop
refitted. This was done by her husband, Edward, who runs a redecorating
business. The cost of refitting the shop was $40,000. Jane did not pay this
amount to Edward despite the fact that the original term orally agreed between
them was that Jane would pay the full amount to Edward within a year. It was
also orally agreed at the time that no interest would be payable on the debt.
The coffee shop business has
proved very successful. Six months ago, the shop next door to Jane’s was put on
the market for sale. Jane saw this as a great opportunity to expand her
business. She spoke to her bank manager about obtaining a loan to finance the
purchase and redecoration of the adjoining shop. The bank manager was concerned
that Jane had not yet paid her outstanding debt to Edward. Furthermore, if Jane
did pay this debt, it seemed that she would not have quite enough capital to
meet the bank’s lending rules.
Jane explained this situation to
Edward. She said she was very keen to buy the shop but she could only do so if
he would accept $10,000 in full and final settlement of the outstanding debt.
Edward agreed to this and they wrote their agreement on a sheet of paper and
both signed it. Edward’s reason for agreeing to this arrangement was partly
because he wanted to help his wife and partly because he assumed that she would
hire him to redecorate the new shop.
Jane produced the signed written
agreement to her bank and, because of it, was able to get a bank loan and go
ahead with the purchase of the shop next door. Jane then arranged for the shop
to be redecorated but she did not engage Edward to do this. Instead, she hired
Max who operates a decorating business across the road from Jane’s coffee shop
business. Jane has paid Max $25,000 for redecorating the shop.
Jane has since spent a lot of time
socially with Max and has now declared her wish to end her marriage to Edward
and start a new relationship with Max.
Edward is outraged at Jane’s
declaration and his first response has been to sue her for the
$30,000 that he claims is
outstanding from his refitting the coffee shop.
Question 1
Advise both parties about their legal position
in respect to this dispute between Edward and Jane.
20 mark
Case Study
Jean was a regular shopper at Top
Star Supermarket, which was part of a large nationwide supermarket chain. She
was there at least once a week and sometimes more often if the specials were
really good.
When Jean was there this week, she
slipped on some grapes in aisle 3 and broke her ankle.
Grapes are normally found in the
fruit section of the store and the store was not sure how the grapes got there
or how long they had been there.
The store manager indicated that
there were a number of spillages every week in the aisles in this store.
Question 2:
Is Top Star Supermarket liable in negligence for Jean’s injury?
5 marks
Bob purchased a woollen jumper
from Clothes Galore in Adelaide. The woollen jumper was made by Southern
Knitting Mills in their Victorian factory.
As a result of wearing the woollen
jumper without first washing it, he contracted dermatitis as the jumper contained
bisulphite of soda, which it was found had been left in the wool during the
manufacturing process.
The bisulphite of soda couldn’t be
seen on a reasonable inspection by either the retailer or the buyer.
Explore the solution of this assignment to the best assignment help from numerous site
Question3:
Has Bob any remedy or remedies available to him
under the Australian Consumer Law?
5 marks
No comments:
Post a Comment