Fundamentals Of Law For Rollinstone Ltd. Essay.

Facts

Discuss about the Fundamentals of Law for Rollinstone Ltd.

Rollinstone ltd. is wholesaler of electrical goods in Australia, who supply their products from a warehouse in Melbourne, Sydney and Adelaide. But three months later the company Rollinstone was sold to Eminem due to issues relating to the quality of the products and the costs that the company has to bear in maintaining the quality of the products that are to be supplied to the customers.

• Jimi Hendricks, who was a regular customer of the Rollinstone Ltd. contacted them in the way they used to deal and Rollinstone had sent an electrician for the advice that was required by the client.
• But due to postal strikes the fax that was to be sent by the client was not delivered. As per the requirements of the client there were few products in the client’s requirement list which were not available to the Rollinstone ltd. and they had to bring it from a company producing such products in Asia, which would take about three months.
• But due to the issues relating to the postal strikes the fax and the information regarding the delivery of the product and the estimation so made was not sent to the client. Jimi Hendricks came to know about the issues of the company after the late delivery of the estimation.
• Therefore leading to a hike of $1000 and it might take about three months to deliver the product.

The issues relating to the case are as follows-

• What are the legal rights that Jimi Hendricks is entitled to get?
• What are the rights and his abilities to enforce them?
• Identifying and deciding whether the rights can be enforced?

Acceptance is a unambiguous statement either written, oral or by conduct, by the offeree agreeing to the offer. The person to whom it is bound for can accept an offer. In Crown V. Clarke, generally no particular form is needed for acceptance. To be effective, acceptance must be communicated. A mental decision to accept is not sufficient. According to the general rule an agreement is said to be concluded whenever the communication is received (Zi et al. 2015). However, in Australia the communication is said to be complete even if they do not read the offer. In Felthouse v. Bindley and Carill V. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co, it was decided that the communication of acceptance is complete the moment it is posted by the other party (López et al. 2014). However, the courts have not decided the stipulated time to conclude acceptance via postal rule.

According to the case of Iannello and Anor vs. Sharpe, the Court gave a decision that the purchasers payment of land will be featured as a deposit as a contradiction to payments which as a result is a penalty and is enforceable.

When the contracts were exchanged, the buyer paid a deposit of $225000 which was 5% of the total purchase price. But as per the set of rules the payable amount was 10% of the purchase price (McEvoy 2013). A special condition in the contract stated that if the buyer was in breach of the contract then the purchaser was accountable for paying the balance of the deposit immediately, failing which the purchaser would forfeit the entire deposit amount.

In this case the purchaser failed to secure finance on time. This was followed by the sellers notice for completion of the purchase procedure which was not complied with (Pirajno et al. 2015). Then the sellers decided to terminate the contract and keep the already deposited amount along with commencing the proceedings to recover the remaining 5% from the buyer.

Issues

In AGC (Advances) Ltd V. Mcwhriter it was decided that invitation to deal has the same status as offers which may be either accepted or rejected.

An offer may be terminated by revocation, ejection, failure to accept on time, death and failure of a condition. Revocation means termination of offer before its acceptance. A revocation must be communicated either directly or indirectly. Rejection refers to the offer placed. Once am offer is rejected it can never be accepted. A rejection needs to be communicated. In Hyde V. Wrench is stipulated. A rejection is to be stipulated within a reasonable time.

Acceptance in the case of umilateral agreements takes the form of performing an act. In Daulia V. Four Milibank, acceptance happens once the acts requested by the offeror were embarked and thereafter could not be revoked.  It is not possible to clearly identify offer and acceptance in some cases. However, by virtue of their conduct it becomes easier to conclude such agreements (Ismail et al. 2014).

Breach of contract occurs when any one of the parties fail to comply with the terms and conditions of the contract. This may happen for a number of reasons. For instance, the misinterpretation of the obligation by either of the parties, incapability of performing and disinclination of performance. In case of breach of contract, a number of remedies are available to the opposite parties. Damages, accounts of profits, exemplary damages and penalty clauses are the remedies available in case of breach of contract (Doyle et al. 2015). 

In the above-mentioned case law there was offer as well as acceptance. Both the parties agreed to the terms and conditions of the agreement. Offer was made by Jimi Hendricks who was a regular client of the Rollinstones. The confirmation of the order was posted to the customer on the same day. The moment the customer posted the confirmation, an agreement was created between the parties and now both the parties have become bound to the terms and conditions of the contract.  According to the Australian Postal Law confirmation via post means that, Rollinstone Ltd. accepted the offer the moment he posted his confirmation irrespective of the fact whether the confirmation was received or not. Therefore, both the parties are now part of the existing contract. Rollinstone Ltd. however has not breached any contract until now. Consequently, due to a postal strike on that day the confirmation post did not reach the customer. Assuming that Rollinstone Ltd. will not be able to deliver the products on time, they send a fax for cancelation (Blenkinsop et al. 2014). The customer, Jimi Hendricks acted on assumption. There are no real facts on the support of the customer to show the Rollinstones any implied interest on the non-delivery of the electrical products (Barnett 2014). The Rollinstone have no liability to bear the loss if the fax was not delivered to the customer due to the postal strike.

Relevant Rules and Cases

In accordance to the Australian Law, the amount of damages is the loss by the other party’s breach. The market value of the goods is kept in mind while determining the damage or loss caused to the other party due to the breach (Aaskov 2014). Howsoever, this is not a decisive factor when determining the amount of damages which a court may decide in case if breach. Rollinstone can also file for accounts of profit (Belford et al. 2015). In this case there is no remedy as the opposite party has not made any profits out of the breaching of the contract. One justification can be exemplary damages allow well-organized breaches to take place.

Therefore, the customer has to pay the extra price of $1000 for the electrical products that the customer wants to get for his construction which was to be brought from a company which was based in Asia.

Conclusion:

This case law enables us to conclude that the performance interest is protected. This interest is protected to increase the protection of performance interest in the future. 

Reference:

Aaskov, J. (2014). Murray Valley Encephalitis. Feigin and Cherry's Textbook of Pediatric Infectious Diseases [7TH ED], 2301-2303.

Barnett, M. R. M. (2014). Evolution: procedural innovation in abduction convention determinations in Australia.

Belford, S. M., Davidson, G. J., McPhie, J., & Large, R. R. (2015). Architecture of the Neoarchaean Jaguar VHMS deposit, Western Australia: Implications for prospectivity and the presence of depositional breaks.Precambrian Research, 260, 136-160.

Blenkinsop, T. G., & Doyle, M. G. (2014). Structural controls on gold mineralization on the margin of the Yilgarn craton, Albany–Fraser orogen: The Tropicana deposit, Western Australia. Journal of Structural Geology, 67, 189-204.

Doyle, M. G., Fletcher, I. R., Foster, J., Large, R. R., Mathur, R., McNaughton, N. J., ... & Rasmussen, B. (2015). Geochronological Constraints on the Tropicana Gold Deposit and Albany-Fraser Orogen, Western Australia. Economic Geology, 110(2), 355-386.

Ismail, R., Ciobanu, C. L., Cook, N. J., Teale, G. S., Giles, D., Mumm, A. S., & Wade, B. (2014). Rare earths and other trace elements in minerals from skarn assemblages, Hillside iron oxide–copper–gold deposit, Yorke Peninsula, South Australia. Lithos, 184, 456-477.                                                                                 

López, A., Frost, R. L., & Xi, Y. (2014). Vibrational spectroscopy of the multianion mineral gartrellite from the Anticline Deposit, Ashburton Downs, Western Australia. Spectrochimica Acta Part A: Molecular and Biomolecular Spectroscopy, 123, 54-58.

McEvoy, D. M. (2013). Enforcing compliance with international environmental agreements using a deposit-refund system. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 13(4), 481-496.

Pirajno, F., Mernagh, T. P., Huston, D., Creaser, R. A., & Seltmann, R. (2015). The Mesoproterozoic Abra polymetallic sedimentary rock-hosted mineral deposit, Edmund Basin, Western Australia. Ore Geology Reviews.

Zi, J. W., Rasmussen, B., Muhling, J. R., Fletcher, I. R., Thorne, A. M., Johnson, S. P., ... & Korhonen, F. J. (2015). In situ U–Pb geochronology of xenotime and monazite from the Abra polymetallic deposit in the Capricorn Orogen, Australia: Dating hydrothermal mineralization and fluid flow in a long-lived crustal structure. Precambrian Research, 260, 91-112.