JP Morgan Chase

JP Morgan Chase

Introduction

The case under discussion, related to JP Morgan Chase, was mainly complicated because of the provision of wrong and falsified information to the security agencies and thus manipulation of the finalized results. This implies that on one hand, the banks prevented the security agencies from fulfilling their purpose and at the other hand; the same betrayed the costumers by presenting false and manipulated information. The following paragraphs would highlight certain essential questions about the case as well as the issues related to the field:

Discussion

Role of Security Agencies in preventing high-risk gambles

The security agencies like Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), are mainly responsible for regulating the future of commodity as well as the option markets in the United States of America. The agencies are mainly responsible for assuring the economic utility of the future markets, by providing encouragement to their competitiveness and the efficiencies. In addition, the same is also responsible for providing protection to the markets against frauds, manipulation as well as the abusive use of trading practices. It should be taken into account that the companies mainly perform the task by making sure that the financial integrity of the clearing process is maintained. Thus, the security agencies are responsible for providing the market users with protection against frauds, manipulation and the implementation of abusive practices. Moreover, the same also ensure that they are protected from the systematic risks related to the derivatives subjected to the Commodity Exchange Act, thus leading to the formation of open, financially secure, safe and competitive markets.

Elements of a valid contract and the duties of consumers and the bank

The essential and the most important elements of the contract include offer and acceptance, the intention to enter a legal relationship and ensuring lawful and legal considerations. In addition, the capacity of the parties should also be reviewed while making contract, there should be free consent from both the sides and the certainty of meaning must also be present (Blum, 2007). The contract should be valid and must not be considered and declared invalid, which implies that all the legal formalities should be fulfilled.

The consumers as well as the banks must ensure that all of the above mentioned elements are fulfilled and all the legal aspects of the contract are also considered. It should be taken into account that both the parties are equally responsible for ensuring that the legal aspects are properly considered and the finalized contract is legally sound and valid. Moreover, both the parties should have good faith and fair dealing while entering the bank relationships, in order to make sure that the contract is legally as well as socially sound. Good faith and fair dealing is also essential to ensure that there is no breach of trust and the costumers as well as the bank can have reliable as well as trustworthy relations.

Comparison and contrast of the differences between intentional and negligent tort actions

Tort can be defined as any action or ...