Interpretation Of Contract Law For High Priest Of Innsmouth Essay.

Discuss About The Monolingual Framing Of International Education.

Responsibilities and Compensation of Dagon

The issue in this case is a result from the event that Dagon who is a follower of Cthulhu Mythos was offered a position bythe congregation of the Cthulhu Mythos Pty Ltd which is a company that is responsible for the administration and spreading of the religion in the New South Wales area and offered Dagon the position of High Priest of Innsmouth on the first week of November 2017. A written contract was established between the Cthulhu Mythos Pty and Dagon which involved responsibilities on the part of the high priest and compensation that were offered. The responsibilities of the high priest involved four activities a) nurturing and increasing the amount of membership in his area b) provide sermons and individual spiritual counsel to the people of Innsmouth c) publish monthly newsletter and bi monthly baking fair to raise money and d) faithfully and diligently serve the congregation with unconditional obedience. In return of which he is likely to receive a quarter to live, weekly stipend of 1000 dollar and support in case he falls ill.

Now the there was a instruction from the Holy council which suggested that 15 cents should be charged on each person who comes to the bi monthly baking fairs for not bringing their own plastic bags. This was intimidated to the Head priests by email. This instruction was not followed by Dagon. Secondly he also forgot to make an offering to Azathoth. This resulted in intimation by Nyarlathotepwho is an authorised representative of the company to Dagon regarding the termination of the contract because of the violation of the fourth point of the contract that is “faithful and diligent service to the congregation and unconditional obedience”. Now advice has to be given to Dagon regarding his way out from the problem.

From the given scenario, it is clearly evident to us that Dagon failed to undertake his roles and responsibilities with due diligence and that is why he was removed from the position of High Priest.However, the Interpretation of contract is one of the clauses that can be used by Father Dagon to defend his situation. Agreement according to contract law is suppose to have a requirement of certainty. The terms and conditions that are mentioned in the contract should have certain meanings in case there is an ambiguity in the clauses of the contract the court might make reconsideration. From the scenario given before us, there is a lot of ambiguity about the existence of a contract that has taken place between Dagon and Cthulhu Mythos Pty Ltd. this is more so evident from the words of Nyarlathotep (the authorised representative of Cthulhu Mythos Pty Ltd.) who was present at the time when the job position of High Priest was offered to Dagon. In the words of Nyarlathotep there was no formal contract between the company and Dagon. But if that is the case then how Cthulhu Mythos Pty Ltd is able to accuse Dagon of failing to perform his roles and responsibilities in a responsible and diligent manner. In a contract, there are various aspects that need to be considered and this makes the contractual agreements an extremely complex legal document. All contracts have implied terms and express terms. The express terms needs to be mentioned clearly within a contract and how they are affecting the parties undergoing the contractual agreement. The implied terms need not be mentioned precisely as the courts often consider them to be intended for inclusion within the contract. While finalising ay contract, all parties must have a clear and thorough understanding about both the express and the implied terms. From the given scenario, it appears that there is confusion among both the involved parties (Dagon and Cthulhu Mythos Pty Ltd) regarding the agreement that took place. While Nyarlathotep offered the position of High Priest to Dagon he constantly emphasised on the aspect of complete obedience to the laws of the Mythos as mentioned in the sacred Necronomicon which was agreed to by Dagon. However evidence from the case scenario suggestsotherwise.

Alleged Violations of the Fourth Point of the Contract

Thus in cases there are responsibilities that are assigned to a person which are contradictory than it is difficult to implement the contract by considering only one instruction. There is a clause called the implied duty of good faith under the Australian contract law. This legislation suggest that in case an action has been taken on the part of a person for the purpose of the betterment of the parties involved in the contract than there is no necessity of having a written contract that suggests that the activity should be undertaken. Herein the aspect of certainty is clearly missing as there are serious questions and doubts that has been raised about the intent to create a legal relation between the two parties. For any contract to hold ground in a court of law, it is important to determine whether  the parties entering into a contract manifested an intent to create a legal relationship or not. The relevance of the circumstances also plays a vital role as is evident from the ABC V XIVthCth Games (1988) 18 NSWLR 540 where the jury considered the existing correspondence between the involved parties and their conduct and behaviour while arriving at a conclusion regarding whether there was an intent to enter into the contract or not.

In the first clause of the contractual agreement, it has been specifically mentioned that Dagon would have to take responsibility for nurturing and increasing the membershipof the congregation of Innsmouth. However, charging of 15 cents per plastoic bag caused a lot of furore among the members of Father Dagon’s congregation at Innsmouth. This is the main reason that Dagon restrained from implementing the 15 cent charge on each plastic bag bought by the followers from the baking fair. The followers of Dagon insisted that he should not impose any charges on the plastic bags and in order to restore faith and trust among his followers Dagon chose to ignore the direct instruction given by the Holy Council. As it was the responsibility of Dagon to ensure the ‘nurture’ of his congregation in Innsmouth so his decision of not implementing the order was as par the clause of the contract which suggested that he should ‘nurture’ the congregation under him. Dagon can also claim that the ‘disquiet’ can result in the possible reduction in the number of membership in his branch in Innsmouth. As the increase in the number of membership is also mentioned in his contract as his duty so he was acting as par the contract.

Interpretation of Contract Law

So,whenever the company is saying that Dagon did not perform his duties in a diligent manner, it is in fact making a baseless and preposterous claimthat has no strong evidence to support.The fact that he tried in his best intent to ensure the betterment of his congregation is proof enough of his strong commitment and loyalty towards Cthulhu Mythos Pty Ltd.The clause of duty of good faith can also be used as evidence by Dagon in his defence by claiming that he believed it in the best interest of the counsel that is to control the ‘disquiet’ that has been created because of the decision. The aspect of formality invariably comes into play as any contract in order to be enforceable must involve consideration which would be wilfully agreed by all the parties entering into the contract. As Nyarlathotephas already denied the existence of any contract between Cthulhu Mythos Pty Ltd. and Dagon so there is doubt and ambiguity about whether the contract could be formally enforced in a court of law. This is where the Conveyancing Act of 1919 (NSW), s 38 comes into the picture and clearly mentions that in the absence of considerations only formalities would be able to make a contract binding to all the involved parties.The second allegation that has been done on Dagon is the fact that he has forgotten to make an offering on the auspicious event of star Fomalhaut being visible from earth. There are chiefly two methods in which Dagon can defend himself of this allegation. First defence comes from the fact that there is no evidence of the breach of the contract. Dagon has himself never confessed that he had missed an offering to Azathoth. It is just an assumption that has been by the Company on the unusual pretext that Azathoth appeared in the councillors’ dreams to complain about Dagon not making an offering. There is no scientific and logical justification for the baseless allegations that have brought against Dagon and this further strengthens his case against Cthulhu Mythos Pty Ltd.The company just cannot dismiss a person from their services based on mere assumption and without any strong substantial evidence regarding their failure to carry out their assigned roles and responsibilities.For a contract to be legal in a court of law, it has to be enforceable on both the parties.The claim of the breach of the contract cannot be proved in the court of law as there is no evidence that suggests that a breach of contract has occurred in this case. Secondly another key defence that can be presented by Dagon is that the clauses of contract don’t involve making an offering to Azathoth. This contributes to a vitiating factor in this case is the aspect of misrepresentation which would allow Dagon to rescind the contract in spite of all elements being present.Dagon has been a victim of innocent misrepresentation which makes his case stronger for claiming damages from Cthulhu Mythos Pty Ltd.This falls under the common law and equity and in the absence of both oral and written evidence cannot be held as a justifiable ground for dismissing Dagon from his position. This is similar to the case of Bissetv Wilkinson (1927) AC  177, 183-184 where the privy council has given diligence to the material facts of the transaction , the understanding and knowledge of the involved parties, their words of representation, their respective positions and the actual conditions or terms set out in the agreement while trying to establish whether the representation was done in a truthful manner or not.So, Father Dagon might claim that this cannot be considered as a breach of contract by the Council.

This question only comes if it is taken into consideration that Dagon is going to admit that he has forgotten to make the offering to Azathoth. But if Father Dagon denies the fact that he has missed giving the offering than there is no proof that can be given by the council in the court of law proving their claim. The evidence of law in Australia doesn’t consider dreams as evidence. The direct observation of a witness is also not going to be considered as evidence in the court of law because a person can also be manipulated. So there is substantial evidence that has to be given in the court of law to prove a claim that is the reason there is no way for the second claim by the counsel to be proven in the court of law unless Dagon confesses himself. So, the advice for Dagon is likely to be denial of the fact that he has forgotten to make an offering to Azathoth.

Reference List

Ashurst, Interpretation Of Contracts Under Australian Law (2018) Ashurst.com <https://www.ashurst.com/en/news-and-insights/legal-updates/quickguides---interpretation-of-contracts--under-australian-law/>

Hughes, W., Champion, R. and Murdoch, J., 2015. Construction contracts: law and management. Routledge.

Lexology, Resolving Conflicting Contract Terms | Lexology (2018) Lexology.com <https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=f961962e-0fc6-4183-a927-176ea87e2892>

Liddicoat, A.J. and Crichton, J., 2008. The monolingual framing of international education in Australia.

Mitchell, C. (2018). Interpretation of contracts. Routledge-Cavendish.

Www5.austlii (2018) Www5.austlii.edu.au <https://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/NSWJSchol/2006/2.pdf>