Business Law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words - 5

Business Law - Essay Example Finally, the contract should not be objectionable through impossibility, illegality or because it is against public policies (Young 2009, p.10). Discussion (a)In responding to case of Peter and Josephine, the paper will explore more on written contracts in order to determine whether their contract was valid. Having written contracts is much safer than verbal contracts. A written contract offers more certainty and at the same time reduces business risks by making the clarity on the agreement from the start of the engagement. Written contracts act as proof of what was agreed on by the involved parties, which acts as security of any disputes. This form of contract is also essential since it provides details on payments, timeframes, and ways on how to solve arising disputes. The other notable thing regarding written contracts is the provision of how they can be varied and conditions under which the contract can be terminated (Charman 2013, p.23). Looking into Peter and Josephine case, on e can point out that there were attempts by the two to make a verbal contract, but due to the underlying circumstances, the verbal contract was never reached. This is evident from the fact that, after Peter made up his mind that he would purchase the painting, he could not reach Josephine via to reach an agreement that he will be going for the painting. Instead, Peter left a phone message and also sent a letter to Josephine, but Josephine sold the painting before listening to the phone message or reading the letter. Therefore, this implies that the two never made any agreement that Peter would buy the painting, which makes it clear that Peter did not have a valid contract. (b) A brief overview on what the common law says about the exemption clause will be helpful in understanding Peter and Larry case. One general feature of written contracts is the fact that the party issuing the contract seeks to minimize its liability under the contract either wholly or partially. Exemption clause s can claim to reduce what would be the defendant’s duty they can claim to restrict the liability, which would otherwise translate to a breach of contract or claim to exclude the party in default fully to cover the other party. In most cases, exemption clauses are applied by stronger parties against weaker parties (Taylor & Taylor 2007, p.57). In the case of Peter and Larry, Peter issues Larry with a ticket that has an exemption clause at the back. The clause states â€Å"all items left in the cloakroom are at the owner’s risk. We do not accept liability for any loss or damage of items however, caused†. Despite the fact that the same message placed at the back of the cloakroom was obscured, it was Larry’s responsibility to read and understand the exemption clause at the back of the ticket. Since the clause exempts Peter from being responsible for the loss of Larry’s coat, Peter should utilize it in defending himself against compensating Larry for h is loss. In Parker v South Eastern Railway (1877) 2 CPD 416 case, the plaintiff left his bag in the cloak-room at the railway station. The plaintiff was issued with ticket that was written â€Å"see back†. On the back side there were several clauses including one that stated â€Å" Business law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words - 8 Business law - Essay Example Whealan, 1934). The trial judge in the case posed a query â€Å"In receiving the money did Peter Whelan act under threats of immediate death or serious personal violence?† The answer of the jury was in the affirmative. The trial judge actually ruled that even though the defendant was forced to accept the stolen money that is he was under duress, but still this cannot be a defence. It only acted as moderation. The court of criminal appeal noted that if a defendant acts under duress then an acquittal will be rare. Thus because of this the case was decided on the general principle of duress ([1934] IR 518, 524). But the Court mentioned that the application of the general principle will have to be limited to certain extent. In this case the Court stated that â€Å"where the excuse of duress is applicable it must further be clearly shown that the overpowering of the will was operative at the time the crime was actually committed, and, if there were reasonable opportunity for the will to reassert itself, no justification can be found in antecedent threats†.1 Thus, the common range of the protection of duress, as sketched in Whelan, is that; â€Å"the will of the defendant must have been overborne by the threats, the duress must be operating when the offence is committed and if there is an opportunity for the individual will to reassert itself and it is not taken, a plea of duress will fail† (in AG v. Whealan, 1934). In Attorney General v. Whelan, it was found that the defendant was in menaces and this was acknowledged to â€Å"death or serious violence†. In this case even though no real threats were faced by the defendant, but it was found that the existence of the person threatening was armed. It was also noted that the person so armed was such a person who will not hesitate even to use the pistol, was adequate to amount to a risk of â€Å"death or serious violence†.2 The ratio decidendi in the case was based on the principle of "neighbour" even though it was