Mike, Trainee Solicitor at ‘Thompson & Thompson' Laptop Computer for Sale Case Study - Law Assignment Help

Assignment

This assessment has been prior verified by SQA and so is suitable for summative use.
Centres should be aware that any changes to the content of the assessment instrument or the marking instructions risks invalidating the assessment.
SQA has left the assessment in the format and font in which they were prepared. On request SQA can supply a Word version of any of the assessments if required.
SQA acknowledges the contribution of LTE Group, trading as MOL, in the development of this assessment.
Please read the following assessment instructions carefully to understand how this final unit assessment needs to be completed.
If the Unit Specification does not refer to a word count, then there is no requirement for one. Where a word count is given then there is an allowance of plus or minus 10%.
Evidence for this learning outcome is generated in the following three case studies and associated questions, worth a total of 30 marks. All three questions should be attempted.
You are required to support your answer where necessary with relevant case and/or statute law.
Question 1
Mike, a trainee solicitor at ‘Thompson & Thompson', put the following message on the noticeboard in the firm’s refreshment area: ‘Laptop computer for sale. Samsung 4500X. One year old. £2000 or nearest offer. If you are interested, please put a note in my post tray or ring extension 6666. Mike B.’
On Tuesday, Derek from the accounts department saw the note and emailed Mike as
follows: ‘Would like the laptop. Will pay £1800. Cheque OK? Please leave a message on the Accounts Department answering machine.’ Mike responded to Derek’s email saying he would consider Derek’s offer.
On Tuesday, Elizabeth from the print room saw Mike’s note and put a note in Mike’s post
tray saying ‘Please keep the laptop for me. Here is a cheque for £2000.’ Unfortunately, when Mike’s secretary collected Mike’s post, unnoticed by her, Elizabeth’s note and cheque slipped out of the stack of post and lodged behind a filing cabinet. Early on Wednesday morning, Marcelle, the cleaner, found Elizabeth’s note and cheque and put them on Mike’s desk.
Later on Wednesday morning, Mike, who was working at a client’s offices, faxed Derek as follows: ‘I accept your offer. In view of the discount, can you pay cash? Reply as soon as possible.’ Mike felt unsure that he had reached the correct fax machine. He therefore also posted a postcard to Derek with the same message he had faxed. In fact, Mike had reached the fax machine in the accounts department, but it was out of ink at the time.
On Wednesday afternoon, when Mike called in to the firm, Mike’s secretary mentioned that she had found Elizabeth’s note and cheque on Mike’s desk. Mike immediately called Derek and left a message on his answering machine saying, ‘Ignore my previous fax and/or postcard. Sorry – have accepted another offer.’
Mike then rang Elizabeth, accepted her offer and arranged to give the laptop to her on Friday. Derek received Mike’s postcard on Thursday morning.
a) Advise Mike as to the nature of his message on the noticeboard in regard to the law of contract. 1 mark
b) How would you characterise Derek’s email and Elizabeth’s note? 4 marks
c) Now assume that Derek’s email and Elizabeth’s note and cheque are both valid offers. Have they been effectively communicated? 3 marks
d) Now consider the nature and effect of Mike’s fax and his postcard. 3 marks
e) Is Mike’s answering machine message effective to relieve him of contractual liability to Derek? Discuss rules as to when an acceptance can be withdrawn. 3 marks
TOTAL: 14 marks
Question 2
Alex owns and runs a business that specialises in the supply of luxury sailing boats to wealthy customers.
He entered into two separate contracts with Joseph, a boat builder.
The first contract was for the renovation and re-fitting of ‘Sea Crest’. The written agreement provided that Joseph would complete all the work within 26 weeks of the date that he commenced work. The agreed price for the work on ‘Sea Crest’ was £50,000.
The second contract was for the renovation and refitting of ‘The Serpent’. The written agreement provided that Joseph would complete all the work within 26 weeks of the date that he commenced work. The agreed price for the work on ‘The Serpent’ was £50,000.
Six weeks after Joseph commenced work, Alex entered into a contract with Stephanie for the sale of ‘Sea Crest’.
That contract provided that Alex should deliver ‘Sea Crest’ to Stephanie within 20 weeks of the date of their agreement. The contract also provided that Alex should pay Stephanie
£1,000 for each and every week that he was late in delivering the vessel to her.
Ten weeks after Joseph commenced work, it became clear to Alex that Joseph was not working sufficiently quickly to complete the work by the agreed date. Alex therefore offered to pay Joseph an extra £10,000 for each of the two vessels that Joseph completed within the time originally agreed.
Joseph consequently worked more quickly. He completed the work on each of the vessels within 26 weeks from the date he started work on the contract in question. Alex is now refusing to pay Joseph the extra £10,000 that he promised for completing work on ‘Sea Crest’ on time. He is also refusing to pay Joseph the extra £10,000 that he promised for completing work on ‘The Serpent’ on time.
Advise Joseph as to whether Alex’s promise to pay an extra £10,000 to Joseph is legally enforceable with reference to both of the contracts between them.
Question 3
Karl, a chef, owns and runs ‘The Happy Pig’, a well-known restaurant. He wished to refurbish his kitchen. He asked Emma, a salesperson for Kitchens R Us Ltd (‘KRU’), to visit his kitchen at ‘The Happy Pig’.
After discussing his requirements for new work surfaces and ovens with Emma, she handed Karl a document entitled ‘Standard Terms & Conditions of Business’.
Karl told Emma that he had no time to read such a lengthy document and asked her to explain its contents. Emma responded that the document contained KRU’s sales policy. That policy was to supply good quality equipment and be fair to its customers. KRU was prepared to exchange goods or refund money where it was in the wrong, but that it would not do so where equipment failed to function properly as a result of abuse or unreasonable wear and tear. Karl then completed and signed an order form for £80,000 worth of equipment.
KRU subsequently supplied and fitted new work surfaces and ovens. Karl later discovered that the ovens did not reach sufficiently high temperatures to enable food to be cooked safely and well. The work surfaces became deeply scratched with everyday use and so were difficult to keep clean.
‘The Happy Pig’ has consequently been unable to trade for the past four months.
When Karl approached KRU to demand that the equipment be removed and he be recompensed, he was referred to the booklet ‘Standard Terms & Conditions of Business’, which (among other things) provided:
‘1. All implied terms, whether by statute or by common law, are hereby excluded’.
‘55. Liability for any breach of contract is hereby limited to the cost of the equipment purchased.’
‘85. All liability for any economic loss resulting from the supply of defective equipment is hereby excluded save where that equipment is returned to KRU’s factory for inspection within a period of 12 days from the breach.’
Advise Karl whether the Standard Terms & Conditions will prevent him from making a claim against KRU.

Learning outcomes 2 and 4 Assessment instructions
Evidence for these learning outcomes is generated from the following case study, worth a total of 25 marks. All sections of question 4 should be attempted.
You are required to support your answer where necessary with relevant case and/or statute law.
Question 4
Kate is 80 years old and frail. Her eyesight is poor. She is forgetful and easily confused. She wished to sell her jewellery in order to finance her stay in a home for the elderly.
She telephoned Sutherland & More, a well-respected firm of jewellers, and told them that she had some valuable jewellery to sell. Because she is an old and valued customer, Sutherland & More offered to send a representative of the firm to see her, to value the jewellery.
Kate’s daughter, Millie, overheard the conversation. Millie told her boyfriend, Larry, what she had heard.
Larry called on Kate and pretended to be from Sutherland & More. He persuaded Kate to hand over her jewellery in return for a cheque for £6,000. The true value of the jewellery is
£26,000.
Larry also asked Kate to sign a document that he described as a bill of sale for the jewellery. In fact, it was a document agreeing to convey the lease of Kate’s house to Millie.
Larry’s cheque for the jewellery has now been dishonoured. He has sold the jewellery to Ted.
Millie is seeking possession of what she now describes as ‘her house’.
a) Advise Kate whether the contract with Larry is:
Void, orb) What are the prospects of Kate succeeding in recovering the jewellery from Larry or to anyone to whom he may have sold the jewellery? 2 marks
c) Is the document signed by Kate effective to transfer ownership of the lease of the house to Millie? 3 marks
Assessment 345 marks
Learning outcomes 3 and 4 Assessment instructions
Evidence for these learning outcomes is generated from the following two case studies and associated questions, worth a total of 45 marks. All sections of questions 5 and 6 should be attempted.
You are required to support your answer where necessary with relevant case and/or statute law.
Question 5
Christine owns and runs ‘Christine’s Cars’, a car hire business.
In August 2016 Christine entered a particularly lucrative contract with a private school, called the Wisteria Lodge School. The contract specified that Christine’s Cars should transport the school’s local day pupils to the school in the morning and return them home in the evening.
In order to carry out her obligations under the contract, Christine purchased two second- hand vehicles, each capable of carrying a driver and seven passengers. Both vehicles were two years old at the time Christine bought them. She paid £12,000 for each of them.
In November 2016 she had both vehicles serviced at Burt’s Garage, a business with which she has dealt regularly for a number of years.
When servicing Christine’s vehicles, Burt fitted the brake pads of the first vehicle incorrectly. He failed to check and replace the engine oil of the second vehicle. The first vehicle was subsequently very difficult to control. Parents complained to the Wisteria Lodge School and refused to allow their children to travel in that vehicle. The second vehicle broke down shortly afterwards, while taking pupils from the school to their homes. The Wisteria Lodge School has consequently terminated its contract with Christine.
Advise Christine on the following:
a) Any claim she may have against Burt for breach of contract. 
b) How any damages would be assessed if her claim against Burt succeeds. 
Question 6
Joanna, the proprietor of a restaurant, decided to have the restaurant refurbished and entered into a contract with ‘Tiles Without Flaws’ to have a new marble floor fitted. It was
agreed that the work would be completed on 1st May at a cost of £12,000. A clause in the contract provided:
‘If Tiles Without Flaws fails to complete the contract within the stipulated time, we undertake to pay, by way of penalty, a sum of £3,000 in full and final satisfaction of our liability.’
She also contracted with Kaitlin’s Kitchens to install new kitchen appliances between 5th – 12th May at a cost of £20,000.
Joanna intended to re-open the restaurant on 15th May and had taken bookings for 500 people for the grand re-opening.
'Tiles Without Flaws' only completed the floor on 15th May. As a result, Joanna had to pay Kaitlin’s Kitchens an extra £7,000 to allow for overtime payments to its employees in order that the kitchen appliances were installed as quickly as possible. She also had to cancel the grand re-opening with a loss of £20,000.
a) Advise Joanna as to whether she can recover all her losses, bearing in mind the effect of the liquidated damages clause in the contract with ‘Tiles Without Flaws’ and whether it will affect Joanna’s ability to recover all her losses against that firm. 8 marks
 

This Law Assignment has been solved by our Law Experts at Exam Question Bank. Our Assignment Writing Experts are efficient to provide a fresh solution to this question. We are serving more than 10000+Students in Australia, UK & US by helping them to score HD in their academics. Our Experts are well trained to follow all marking rubrics & referencing style.
    
Be it a used or new solution, the quality of the work submitted by our assignment Experts remains unhampered. You may continue to expect the same or even better quality with the used and new assignment solution files respectively. There’s one thing to be noticed that you could choose one between the two and acquire an HD either way. You could choose a new assignment solution file to get yourself an exclusive, plagiarism (with free Turnitin file), expert quality assignment or order an old solution file that was considered worthy of the highest distinction.