Advise all parties on any potential claims and liabilities which could arise from the above facts. The Nuptials Nibbles, a local catering company that is owned by Sarah entered into an agreement by the local builder named Jenny South. The sole purpose of entering into this agreement was for Nuptials Nibbles catering company was contracted to do a wedding at an agreed price of $25 per head. Sarah turned down the agreement at the last minute when Jenny South would not find someone with qualified skills and abilities to hand le the wedding catering and meet the expectations of the employer.
According to the write-up, Sarah didn’t disclose the reason why she was no longer interested in Jenny South’s wedding to Jenny but instead assured Rahul of doing the mayor’s daughter’s wedding if she doubled the price for an anticipated 100 guests.
Now, it is not very clear whether the binding agreement between Jenny South and Sarah was verbal or written or whether it was contractual in nature but it is plain white and black that after Sarah failed to hold her end of the bargain, Jenny South suffers embarrassments since the alternative contractor would not perform to the expectation and ended up serving inedible food which completely ruin the wedding.
This got Jenny angry and upset with Sarah’s action. Following their agreement, it is no doubt that it was a contractual agreement thus requires the prerequisite knowledge of the contract law that would examine the validity of the disclaimer which in essence will look into the terms of the contract between the duos.
Proper examination of their terms of contract may lead to either denying of any potential liabilities for damages.
Disclaimer is also an exception clause that albeit help in limiting liabilities or excluding liabilities. Whether the duos entered into the agreement formally or informally, when terms of the contract have limits, any party is free to act negligently or unreasonably without the application of the dare consequences if the terms of contract were pegged to limitations. In most cases, clauses that allow any party, after entering into an agreement to either behave unreasonably or negligently, are considered as unfair clauses henceforth contracts that contain clauses with exclusion of limitations are considered as ineffective and legally invalid. In order for the disclaimer to consider effective and fair, the exclusion clause qualifies for the liabilities and harm caused, that means they covered by the clause. When the disclaimer foresee risks in entering into a contract with a particular party without any measures to counteract the risk, the contract will be considered fair.
Nuptials Nibbles is a sought-after catering company, it is bound by law to serve the clients and obey certain rules and regulations provided by commonsense irrespective of whether they are included in the terms and conditions of the contract or not. Where the contract of agreement do not provide for compensation of damages caused by failure to work in Jenny South’s wedding, such contracts are considered as ineffective and unfair thus unenforceable. Lastly, under such circumstances, the disclaimer who in this case is Jenny South might misleadingly state the consumer’s right, which includes the Misrepresentation Act of 1967 under the statute McKendrick, 2018). The Misrepresentation Act of 1967 highlights in the 3rd section that in case the contract terms excludes or restricts remedies or liabilities “shall be of no effect except insofar as it satisfies the requirement of reasonableness as stated in section 1(1) of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977’ (McKendrick, 2018). It is only within the scope of the 3rd section that the clause must come from and must also meet all the conditions for reasonableness.
In cases where the clause fail then the exclusion of remedies still fall within the scope of the 3rd section but without reliance or representation clauses whence if a clause of the contract agreement prohibits the collateral warranty then it slides off the 3rd section scope of the Misrepresentation Act of 1967. It is very possible that Nuptials Nibbles owned by Sarah could have extended unreasonable behavior or action which contradicted terms of their contract and destroyed hope and Jenny’s wedding, it is also possible that Sarah can deny liabilities by citing that there was such a thing in their agreement. In the case between the Nuptials Nipples verses the Seaside Event Towers owned by Rahul, the binding agreement was the $50 per head if Sarah holds the end of her bargain. She was suppose to prepare and make sure that there were ample vegetarian canapés, she was suppose to participate in the preparation of every meal and drink, and she was obligated with a duty to serve meals and drinks in a given window.
The contract was verbal but binding. After the mayor’s daughter wedding, things didn’t take the correct trajectory as anticipated by Sarah; Rahul was furious and breathing fire for the disappointment he got. Rahul claimed that Sarah didn’t meet his expectation and he had to use $500 to buy extra vegetarian canapés at Waitrose to supplement the over 90% meat vegetarian canapés prepared by Sarah. Well in this case, the contract should express implicitly the exclusion of liability for negligence, which can be subjected to the Unfair Contract terms Act of 1977. Sarah acted out of negligence and she caused Mr. Rahul to use an extra money to cover for expenses that were ought to have been covered by Sarah, besides, the mayor refused to pay him the remaining balance citing that the catering company didn’t meet the threshold of what she expected on his daughter’s wedding. Now, the contractual terms that Rahul entered into with Sarah and that which he entered with the Mayor seems to be not expressing thus ineffective.
The main intention of introducing the Unfair Contract terms Act of 1977 was solely to declare some clauses that support exclusion ineffective and to legally officiate the subjection of others to reasonableness as encapsulated in the 11th section of the same Act (Morgan). Mr. Rahul may as well file a case against Nuptials Nipples Catering Company and the Act will come to effect because the defendant is liable in negligence Rahul (claimant). In the same suit, the mayor may as well file a case against Mr. Rahul because he didn’t show competency in selecting the best catering company to contract in the mayor’s daughter’s wedding, in this light, Mr. Rahul showed some fashion liable in negligence. In the case of Sarah and Rahul, it is not clear whether Nuptials Nipples has a physical location but either way, the Act will be applicable anyway.
Jenny South has a wider perspective to explore because the negligence showed by Sarah includes both the negligence in Tort and the contractual negligence expounded herein. She has the same path to explore as Mayor too because the mayor can extend the negligence to include the negligence in Tort. Even in the absence of contractual relationship, the Act is broader and covers even notices bearing clauses to exclude liability for negligence, hence the wider coverage of this Act will contribute immensely in support of Mr. Rahul, Mayor and Jenny South. Section 1(1) of the Unfair Contract Terms Act of 1977 under the 2rd section highlights liabilities that arise from negligence, and the 3rd section provides the breach of contract. The 2rd section applies to both notices and contractual relationships so irrespective of the kind of contract terms that Sarah and Jenny, Sarah and Rahul, and Mayor and Rahul entered into the clause still applies.
Neville Rayner, the secretary to the local rotary club who were supposed to be hosted by Rahul in his Seaside Towers but because the Towers burnt down, Mr. Rahul were unable to host them in a non-existence hall, may find a supportive section in Unfair Contract Terms Act of 1977, to validate their legal action against Mr. Rahul. On the material day, Mr. Rahul was unable to host them and it seems like all the Seaside properties including the Pier Oh were occupied and the only solution to their problem is to postpone their annual dancing celebration. Due to that situation it was as inconveniencing as that it, Neville can file a legal law suit against Mr. Rahul under the section 5 and 6 of the above Act which addresses the liabilities arising from the supply of goods and services. In accordance to section 5, Mr. Rahul was bound to provide the local rotary club with the hall irrespective of the circumstances or change of events lest he is liable to not exclusion of the liabilities and damages. According to Morgan, the 6th section of the Unfair Contract Terms Act of 1977 clearly outlines the sales and hire purchase of goods and services and advises that when the buyer is the end consumer, which in this case, the local rotary club was the end consumer of the product, it is impossible to exclude the seller, Mr. Rahul, from the implications of the terms of contract liability if breached as he did.
In conclusion, after all that misunderstanding and mess that was created, Sarah, Jenny, Rahul, Mayor, and Neville should be well advised on their rights so that they may claim for compensations as sustained in the contract and negligence in Tort. The defendants, Sarah, Rahul, and Mayor should be well advised and informed about ways through which they can successfully defend themselves in the court of law to reduce likely liabilities leveled against them. Draw up a brief contract which would have encapsulated the terms orally agreed by Rahul and Sarah for the catering of the Mayor’s daughter’s wedding. An agreement reached on a handshake – “Make X for me and I will pay you Y” – is a contract, because it’s legally binding agreement that involves an exchange of promise. Most of the contracts are executive, both oral and written. However, it’s important to always have a written contract for all the business relationship.
The process of drafting the terms of the contract and the signature requires that both parties think and clarify their obligations. With an oral contract, it’s too easy for both parties to agree and then change the mind. Instead when the term of contract are written, it’s likely that the parties will create a more complete and in depth agreement than a verbal agreement. Many contract are full of legal rights, but there is no reason why this is true. For most contracts, legal jargon is neither essential nor useful. On the contrary, the agreements you would like to put in written contract better be in simple and everyday English. Most contracts must contain only two legally valid elements: All parties must agree. And some value options must be exchanged, such as assets, services or money.
This Agreement is entered into as of the 11th day of November 2018, between Sarah (‘the Committee’) and Mr. Rahul (‘the Contractor’) Contract/ Order number: N08883-JC777-98 7 Contract Type: ETOA Security Classification: See below
Contract Completion Date: ………………………………………..
Customer approving authority – ……………………………………
Prepared by …………………………………………………………
1. Independent Contractor. The terms and conditions stipulated by this agreement hereby engage the Contractor and the Committee as independent person to do the service set forth herein, and the Contractor hereby accepts the service.
2. Compensation, Term, and Duties. The Contract will be compensated upon delivering the services as stipulated in the attached document below. The duties of the Contractor and the terms of the contract are also as attached below.
3. Conflict of Interest. The Contractor expressed that she is willing and able to enter into the agreement without violation of the rights to the third party.
4. Termination. The Committee may terminate the contract through a phone call or a written document supplied to the Contract in 5 days.
5. Assignment. The Contractor will not delegate her duties to unknown party to this agreement without the consent of the Committee.
6. Unenforceability of Provision. The reminder of this agreement or part of it remain to be in full force should there be any provision that is held unenforceable and invalid.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned have entered into an agreement as of the above mentioned day and year. Facsimile signatures will be treated as original as appended hereto.
Date……………………………………………. In ………………………………………………..
COMPENSATION, TERM, AND DUTIES
DUTIES: The Contractor will do the Mayor’s daughter’s wedding, make all the food herself, make sure that there are ample vegetarian canapés as well as meat dishes, and serve each course promptly within a two-hour window.
TERM: Upon the completion of the above duties, this agreement will no longer be useful but maybe renewed under the mutual agreement act.
COMPENSATION: After the full dispensation of the above aforementioned duties herein, the Committee will compensate the Contractor USD$ 50 per head of all the attendance of the Mayor’s daughter’s wedding.
European Contract Law and Asian Contract Law. (n.d.). Uniform Rules for European Contract Law : A Critical Assessment. [Accessed Nov. 2018].
Lawteacher.net. (2018). An Introduction to Contract Law. [online] Available at: https://www.lawteacher.net/modules/contract-law/ [Accessed Nov. 2018].
McKendrick, E. (2018). Contract Law. Law Trove. [Accessed Nov. 2018].
Morgan, J. (n.d.). Against regulation through contract law. Contract Law Minimalism, 114-157.[Accessed dec 2018].