New

Learn smart - Learn online. Upto 88% off on courses for a limited time. View Courses

Securing Higher Grades Costing Your Pocket? Book Your Assignment at The Lowest Price Now!
loader
Add File

Error goes here

Files Missing!

Please upload all relevant files for quick & complete assistance.

Guaranteed Higher Grade!

BUSN331 Business Law

tag 0 Download 6 Pages / 1,444 Words tag 21-11-2020
  • Course Code: BUSN331
  • University: Centennial College
    icon

    MyAssignmentHelp.com is not sponsored or endorsed by this college or university

  • Country: Canada

Questions:


1. Dhingra, 2012 ONCA 261 (CanLII) Dhingra was the beneficiary of his wife's life insurance policy. He was charged with murdering her but was found not criminally responsible because of a mental disorder. He applied to have the insi:'ance proceeds paid to him. The Court refused his application because of the public policy rule that prohibits a person from benefiting from his criminal acts.

Should the public policy rule apply when the person who has committed the crime is found not criminally responsible for the crime"? 
 
2. Teleflex Inc. v. I.M.P. Group Ltd., (1996), 149 N.S.R. (2d) 355 (NS CA); 1996 CanLII 5603
Teleflex Inc., an American company manufacturing aircraft components, knew that I.M.P. Group Ltd. was negotiating with the Brazilian government to carry out a program for the turbinization of itsTracker aircraft fleet. Teleflex offered to supply necessary parts, to which proposal I.M.P. responded with a purchase order for 13 quadrant assembly sets at $27500 each. The shipping schedule was to commence in March 1990. Included was a provision whereby I.M.P could order a suspension of the work with a reasonable price adjustment, and a further provision whereby I.M.P. could terminate the order with payment to Teleflex for both completed and uncompleted work, according to a formula that factored in lost profits. Thereafter, Teieflex commenced manufacturing the quadrant assembly units.
In September 1989, Teleflex received the first of a series of notices from I.M.R requesting PostPonernerit of delivery of the units. Teleflex acknowledged receipt of these stop-work letters, advising that n the event of termination its termination liability schedule "attached to our original proposal will apply." I.M.P continued to experience difficulties in closing the deal with the Brazilian government and finally, in 1994, indicated it would not be requiring fulfillment of the purchase order.
Teleflex treated this as a termination notice arid advised I.M.P that it would submit' termination claim based on work performed to date. The claim amounted to US$229576 for materials, overhead, and profit. I.M.P. countered that no monies were payable because the contract had been frustrated by the Brazilian government, and further, assembly units were ever delivered by Teleflex. no quadrant assembly units were ever delivered by Teleflex.

Based on these facts, was the contract frustrated? Is any money payable to Teleflex? What factors affect your conclusion?
3. Royal Bank of Canada v. Gill (1988), 47 D.L.R. (4th) 466 (B.C.C•A.); 1988 CanLII 2970 (BC CA) The younger Mr. Gill was fluent in English and a sophisticated businessperson. He had worked in a credit union for a number of years and had managed his father's berry farm. To take advantage of a business opportunity, he arranged with the Royal Bank to borrow $87000. During the negotiations, it became clear that he could get a more favourable rate of interest if his father guaranteed the loan. In fact, the son had done a considerable amount of banking on behalf of his father, who was also a customer of the same bank. The elder Gill could not read, write, or speak English and relied on his son in all his busi-ness dealings.The documents were prepared, and the son brought his father to the bank   F to sign. At no time did he explain to his father that he was signing a personal guarantee, and the evidence is clear that the father had no idea what he was signing other than that it was a document associated with a loan transaction. Gill, Sr., had implicit faith in his son's handling of his business affairs. Gill, Jr., on the other hand, was so excited about the deal that he apparently never explained the nature of the documents to his father- It is clear in this situation that at no time was there any misrepresentation to the father of the son on the part of the bank. When the son defaulted on the loan, the bank turned 5° the father for payment. Should Gill, Sr., be held responsible for this debt? What precautions should the bank " taken?

Identify the best arguments of the ban, kav_ke advance? 'her. What arguments should the bar' 
 
4. Chopra v. Eaton (T.) Co. (1999), 240 A.R. 201 (Q.B.); 1999 ABQB 201 (CanLII) Chopra went to Eaton's department store seeking a refund. An argument ensued. Frauenfeld (from security) told Chopra that he would have to leave; Frauenfeld took Chopra's elbow and started to escort him out of the store. Near the doors, Chopra pushed Frauenfeld away, presumably wishing to go through the doors unassisted. Frauenfeld reacted quickly and violently, putting Chopra into a headlock. Chopra's glasses were knocked off and his lip was cut; he was handcuffed, detained in the security office, and subjected to racial slurs. Chopra asked to leave, asked to call his wife, and asked Frauen-feld to call the police; all of these requests were refused. After Chopra had been detained for four hours or more, the police arrived and charged Chopra with assaulting Frauenfeld and causing a disturbance. All charges were later dismissed.

Identify what causes of action are available to Chopra to address the wrongs done to him. 
Based on these facts, was the contract frustrated? Is any money payable to Teleflex? What factors affect your conclusion?  
 
5. R. v. Spratt, 2008 BCCA 340 (CanLII); application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court dismissed June 18, 2009 Spratt and Watson were charged under sections 2(11(a) and 2(1 )(b) of the provincial Access to Abortion Services Act as a result of their activities outside of a Vancouver health clinic. Signs stating "You shall not murder" and "Unborn Persons Have the Right to Live" were waved within a "bubble" or access zone outside the abortion clinic. The law aims to protect women from interference in this zone. The accused argued that the law violates their freedom of expression.

Whose rights should be paramount in cases such as this? 
Download Sample Now

Earn back the money you have spent on the downloaded sample by uploading a unique assignment/study material/research material you have. After we assess the authenticity of the uploaded content, you will get 100% money back in your wallet within 7 days.

Upload
Unique Document

Document
Under Evaluation

Get Money
into Your Wallet

Total 6 pages

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:


We Can Help!

Get top notch assistance from our best tutors !
Excel in your academics & career in one easy click!

icon

Other Samples

Content Removal Request

If you are the original writer of this content and no longer wish to have your work published on Myassignmenthelp.com then please raise the content removal request.

icon

5% Cashback

On APP - grab it while it lasts!

Download app now (or) Scan the QR code

*Offer eligible for first 3 orders ordered through app!

screener
ribbon
callback request mobile
Have any Query?