English Contract Law

In: Custom essay samples

English Contract Law: Full-Text Essay Sample

The purpose of contract law is to ensure that there will be a remedy if the agreement is not carried out or carried out in violation of the terms laid down by the parties.  The current English contract law does not require a written agreement and can be made orally.  The main point is that contract law is made between two parties (Dodgy Tony Ltd and Gordon) and by entering a contract both parties are bound to fulfill the contact terms.  Gordon has the right to claim back the money spent on processors because Dodgy Tony Ltd has violated the terms of a contract.  Invoice sent by server provider included a note stating “all the other terms as per original quotation.”  According to the original quotations, Gordon specified that the servers with latest processors and maximum storage capacities to be delivered in one month and sent a cheque stating “contracting under my specification”.  Thus, the first violation of contact is related to late delivery:  servers were not delivered within the specified timeframe.  Second, Gordon received the servers which were not energy-sufficient and did not have the latest processor.  The only requirement fulfilled by Dodgy Tony Ltd was the maximum storage capabilities of the delivered servers. 

The failure to provide servers specified in the order, gives Gordon the right to claim recovery of money due, specific performance, and termination of the contract. Dodgy Tony Ltd has not delivered the goods specific in contract (non-performance); therefore, the contract terms were not carried out properly.  Instead of the energy-efficient servers having the latest processor, Dodgy Tony Ltd provides servers which were not energy-sufficient and did not have the latest processor.  Since 1977, every contract is a subject to Unfair Contract Terms Act.  In this specific case, Gordon is entitled to withdraw from the contract because he has specified that the decision to buy energy-efficient servers with the latest processor was made based on the need to desire to deliver services efficiently and in order to better administer orders.   Therefore, energy-efficiency and the latest processors were the terms of prime importance. 

If Gordon has not specified the importance of energy-efficient servers having the latest processors, he would not be entitled to withdraw from the contact and the contract would be considered a breach of warranty.  The fact that the terms were specified as important and the failure of Dodgy Tony Ltd to fulfill the terms creates the breach of condition altering the nature of the contract.  In addition, the contract is void because it is induced by a misrepresentation.  Gordon was misled by Dodgy Tony Ltd and has the right to treat the contract as void and withdraw from it.  In this specific case, the misrepresentation was not made innocently and it was unreasonable for Dodgy Tony Ltd to make a contract because the company was not able to fulfill the terms. 

Even though both parties have made the same mistake in relation to contract terms, the contract should be terminated because there was no “consensus ad idem” according to the European Communities Act 1.  The failure to provide servers specified in the contract automatically gives Gordon the right to render the contract void.  When Dodgy Tony Ltd sent an invoice stating “all the other terms as per original quotation”, the company agreed with the terms of customer, Gordon.  These terms were energy-sufficient servers with the latest processors and maximum storage capabilities.  The cheque signed by Gordon stated, “Contracted under my specification”.  Thus, specifications stated by Gordon were initially accepted by Dodgy Tony Ltd.  The failure to meet these specifications automatically makes the contact void. 

Dodgy Tony Ltd might ague that it was specified that Gordon received a written reply about the servers with the older generation processors costing 5,000 each, nevertheless, Gordon has not accepted this term.  Gordon replied that he was ready to pay 4,500 each for the latest processors.  Taking into account that invoice sent by Dodgy Tony Ltd was for 45,000 (not 50,000 as it would be if Gordon accepted an offer of servers with the older generation processors with maximum storage capabilities), therefore, Dodgy Tony Ltd accepted the terms of Gordon.  Moreover, the delivered servers were not the ones promised by Dodgy Tony Ltd or expected by Gordon.  Initially, Dodgy Tony Ltd offered energy-efficient servers with the older generation processors and maximum storage capabilities, while Gordon ordered energy-efficient servers with the latest processors and maximum storage capabilities.  The contract was not carried out properly because Gordon received servers which were not energy-efficient and did not have the latest processors.  Only one point of contact has been carried out – servers had maximum storage capacities.  

Gordon has the right to return servers to supplier and claim back the money spent on servers because one of the vital contact terms has been violated:  delivery.  When discussing the servers’ delivery, Gordon has specified the price he is ready to pay, the technical characteristics of servers he orders, and a delivery date:  one month after the order was placed.  Dodgy Tony Ltd delivered servers two months after the order was placed.  Gordon has the right to claim the contract being void for the three reasons:  servers he received are not energy-efficient, the processors are old, and the late delivery of the order.  Dodgy Tony Ltd has to refund the money because the cheque they received clearly stated “contracted under my (Gordon’s) specifications”.  These specifications were accepted by Dodgy Tony Ltd, nevertheless, most of the terms specified by Gordon were not carried out.


Order Now
 
 
  Order Now Forgot password?