OBLIGATION LAW

Obligation Law

Obligation Law

Introduction

The Law of Obligations include some law rules that formalize the duties of action between two or more persons. This discipline is the "hard core" of private and public law, in which legal relations are most often found in the form of legally binding contracts. In general, the creation of an obligation is not subject to any rules of formality. In a contract, the only meeting of the minds on the subject of the provision and pricing of this benefit is sufficient to establish an obligation; for example, the sales contract. In non-contractual matters, some events become facts creating obligations, including an injury to others.

This paper tends to analyze the legal implications of some of the given scenarios and provide sensible advice to the parties concerned. It begins by analyzing the relevant legal positions of each of the involved parties and provides advice on the legal front. The aim is to create an understanding of the significance of performing a contract in the eyes of the law. In case of breach of contract, there are certain impositions on each of the parties, including the party that has been injured due to nonperformance. It provides us with an insight as to what can be the relevant legal positions of each of the parties in the contract also a chance to advise them for carrying out specific performance of the contract (Monahan, 2007).

Description of Scenario1

In our first scenario, Laurel & Hardy Ltd. (L&H) insisted on the purchase of the shear at a list price of £900,000 from Bravo Shearing Ltd. (BSL) although BSL admitted that the list price on the brochure was misquoted and that the real price of the shear is £980,000. BSL confessed about their misquotation, but L&H insisted that the seller is bound to sell at the list price of the brochure.

Advice to Parties according to their Legal Positions

According to the law, BSL has not been bound under any contract. The only obligation under this scenario was the delivery of the brochure to the buying party, and that was carried out. If BSL confessed that there had been some misquotation on their part, it can simply be referred to as a negligent misrepresentation on BSL's front. Negligent misrepresentation at common law occurs when the defendant carelessly makes a representation while having no reasonable basis to believe it to be true. This type of misrepresentation was introduced to allow damages in situations where neither a collateral contract nor fraud is found. In this case, we can see that neither there had been a fraudulent practice involved nor was there a collateral contract. The contract is not binding since both the parties just exchanged basic information about the product and did not agree to any terms or conditions at all (Poole, 2006).

The given scenario would have been considered a contract under the law, if the parties had mutually agreed to a specific price of product and then ...