contents of a contract

Question 1

differentiating tests (5)

TERM= BREACH OF CONTRACT 
REPRESENTATION= IF RELIED UPON BECOMES MISREPRESENTATION.

Answer 1

1. couchman v Hill (calf)-importance of a statement
2. oscar chess ltd v William (car on wrong model)- special skills or knowledge
3. schawel v reade (horse)- prevents c from checking the statement
4. routledge v McKay (motorbike on registration of bike was wrong)- reduction into writing
5. routledge v McKay- when the statement was written. It would therefore amount to a misrepresentation and not not a breach.

Question 2

contract term (3)

Answer 2

condition: poussard case (opera singer fell ill and was replace)
warrant: bettini v gye (6 days earlier arrival)

innomate term: hong kong case (precedent)

Question 3

rules governing written contracts (3)

Answer 3

parole evidence rule: HENDERSON V ARTHUR (a lease contract that said payment was to be in advance quarterly payments. However, the previous oral agreements had said arrears. the court stated that the drawing up of the contract meant that the previous oral agreements were extinguished.)
exceptions 5.

signature rule: L’ESTRANGE V GRAUCOB
exceptions are 2 (misrepresentation in the CURTIS V CHEMICAL CLEANING & fraud, duress, misrepresentation or non est factum cause every party in the contract must have full knowledge of what they are getting into)

the rule on incorporation into written contracts (different document-3):
1. i) reasonable notice of them: PARKER CASE on lost bag in the station the ticket had a see back notice for clause limiting liability.
time of notice: OLLEY V MARLBOROUGH CASE for the ii) loss of a court in a hotel after they had already signed a contract and saw a sign on the wall.
2. document intended to have contractual effect: CHAPLETON CASE on chair that gave way. court held ticket is not a document meant for contractual effects.

3. terms incorporated regularly and consistently: HENRY KENDALL CASE (100 similar contracts)

Question 4

Implied terms (4)

Answer 4

1. facts: 2 tests (shirlaw case- judge said and moroock case- necessary for transaction)
2. custom: smith v Wilson (on rabbits)
3. law: in the sales of good and land act
4. trade usage: henry Kendall case (100 contracts) = British crane hire case ( part of their dealings; every dealing they had and they had contract twice in the last week)

Question 5

rules of contractual interpretations (3)

Answer 5

1. the ordinary meaning of the words
2. matrix of facts: Marley v Rawlings ( FIND OUT INTENTION OF THE PARTIES BY IDENTIFYING TH E MEANING OF THE WRODS THROUGH THE MEANING OF WORD, PURPOSE, THE WHOLE CONTRACT PROVISIONS OR FACTS OR ASSUMPTIONS MADE DURING THE DRAWING UP OF THE CONTRACT)
3. business common sense: rainy sky case (MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH BUSINESS COMMON SENSE AND REJECT THE ONE THAT IS NOT.