Legal Case Scenarios: Contract Law

Yummy Bakery Sdn. Bhd. v. Hot Oven Sdn. Bhd.

Question 1

Yummy Bakery Sdn. Bhd.  entered into a contract for the sale and purchase of oven with Hot Oven Sdn. Bhd.  

One of the terms of the contract states the followings;

The seller agrees to deliver an oven suitable for bakery.

Besides that, another term of the contract states that;

The seller has the right to vary any terms in this contract without the consent of the buyer as and when it deemed necessary as long as the variation do not jeopardise the interest of any parties to the contract.

Subsequently, the oven was delivered by Hot Oven Sdn. Bhd  however, the oven could only reach a temperature of 180 Celsius.  Yummy Bakery Sdn. Bhd. alleged that the oven delivered is not suitable for commercial baking and refused to pay for the oven. 

You have been appointed to act for Hot Oven Sdn. Bhd. (Plaintiff)/ Yummy Bakery Sdn. Bhd. (Defendant).

Question 2

William is an antique vases merchant, and he has a substantial quantity of antique vases for sale. One day, Harry another local antique vases merchant visited William. Harry inspects the vases and was attracted with one of the vases displayed. He quite rapidly and mistakenly forms the impression that, the vase originated from the Ming Dynasty and has a market price of USD 3 Million. In fact, it is a vase from a later era worth only USD 2 Million. 

Assuming that the vase is from the Ming Dynasty, Harry wrote to William saying that he “will take the vase and pay the price for the vase at USD 3 Million”. William was pleasantly surprised and wrote back to Harry “accepting the offer”.  Harry has now discovered the true position and refuses to take delivery of the vase and pay the agreed price.

You have been appointed to act for William (Plaintiff)/ Harry (Defendant).

Question 3

Sally and her mother, Jill came into an agreement whereby, Jill agreed to provide a house for Sally to reside, pay for her fees and monthly allowances so long as she pursue her studies in the medical university nearby home.  Subsequently, Jill was informed by the university that Sally did not pass her exams and was advised to change her course to physiotherapy.

Upon hearing this news, Jill immediately stopped payment and asked Sally to come home and stay with her. Sally argued the agreement between herself and her mother amounted to a legally binding contract and, as such, she is entitled to change her course and continue studying. Jill argued there was merely an informal family arrangement, which Sally has failed to fulfill and Jill was, therefore, not bound by the terms agreed. 

William v. Harry

You have been appointed to act for Sally (Plaintiff)/ Jill (Defendant).

Question 4

Amir plan to move to his hometown at Muar, Johor subsequent to his retirement as a teacher. He is currently residing in Subang Jaya with his wife and children and decided to sell the house for RM 900,000. Amir remembered his friend Joe, who recently told him that he was looking for a house in Subang Jaya. Hence, on 3rd of August 2021, Amir wrote a letter to his friend Joe, offering to sell his house. In his letter, Amir stated the following:

If I do not hear from you before 31st August 2021, I will consider that you are not interested in my offer.

Subsequently, Joe accepted Amir’s offer and replied by post on 5th August 2021. Due to an error in the postal delivery system, Joe’s letter was misdirected, and reached Amir on 1st September 2021.  Since Amir did not receive acceptance from Joe before the due date, Amir sold his house to Carry instead.    
You have been appointed to act for Joe (Plaintiff)/ Amir (Defendant).

Question 5

Akbar, aged 17 years old will be sitting for his final examinations at Sri Gembira School in October. Early this year, Akbar decided that he needed the help of a tutor because of his poor past performance in Mathematics. As a result, in January, Akbar began to attend tuition classes taught by Miss Sweetie. After paying Miss Sweetie’s tuition fees for three months, Akbar told her that he was short of cash and had to delay paying her the tuition fees. Akbar said that he was looking for a part-time job and would pay Miss Sweetie all the arrears of tuition fees immediately upon securing a job. Miss Sweetie agreed and continued giving him tuition until June.

At the end of July 2018, Akbar decided that he would quit school after his final examinations and become a professional dancer. He bought some fancy clothes on credit from Baju Baju Sdn. Bhd. by representing himself to be 20 years old. Akbar paid a deposit of RM150.00 and agreed to pay the balance of RM 2850.00 in a week’s time.

Akbar now decided that he would not pay Miss Sweetie the arrears of tuition fees. Besides that, he will not pay Baju Baju Sdn. Rhd. the balance of RM2,850.00.    
You have been appointed to act for Ms. Sweetie and Baju Baju Sdn. Bhd.  (Plaintiff)/ Akbar (Defendant).

Question 6

Frank wrote to his nephew Bert, offering to buy his horse adding ‘if I hear no more about him I shall consider the horse mine at RM 100,000. His nephew intended to sell the horse to his uncle but did not reply to the letter. He told Bob who was auctioning his farm, not to include the horse in the auction as it was already sold. Bob sold the horse by mistake. A week later, Frank was informed of the sale, and decided to sue Bert. You have been appointed to act for Frank (Plaintiff)/ Bert .

Question 7

Samuel and Samy negotiated for delivery of logs through a series of letters. In one of the letters, both of them agreed that an agreement for the sale and purchase of logs will only be entered into through a formal contract of sale. Unfortunately, Samuel withdrew subsequent to finalising all the terms of the contract for the sale and purchase of logs. Samy felt betrayed and wishes to sue Samuel for breach of contract. You have been appointed to act for Samy (Plaintiff)/ Samuel (Defendant).

Question 8

ABC Sdn. Bhd. a manufacturer of  X pill, advertised in newspapers which have been circulated throughout Malaysia, that the stated pill  will prevent those who consume it from coronavirus. In the advertisement, the company offered RM100,000 to anyone who still succumbed to coronavirus after consuming their pill. Ms. Kathy who consumed the pill and subsequently was infected by coronavirus tried to exercise her right by claiming for the sum promised. However, her request was rejected. You have been appointed to act for Ms. Kathy (Plaintiff)/ ABC Sdn. Bhd. (Defendant).