Midterm Study

Question 1

The Mirror Rule

Answer 1

The acceptance must mirror the offer ex: offer proposed at $1000, acceptance for $1000

Question 2

Can acceptance be deemed or assumed?
Yes or No

Answer 2

No, it cannot be deemed or assumed. Think about the case with the uncle offering to buy the horse from the nephew and saying if I dont hear back its mine (Felthouse v Bindley)

Question 3

D offers to P, P counters, D rejects, deal is closed. P sends another offer, D has no response, is this valid?

Answer 3

No not valid because P essentially made a new offer (Hyde v Wrench)

Question 4

Which of these can be assumed?
Acceptance?
No Acceptance?

Answer 4

No Acceptance can be assumed while Acceptance cannot

Question 5

Invitation to treat (stores)

Answer 5

inviting offer

Question 6

Offer (vending machine)

Answer 6

no negotiation, has everything needed to be accepted

Question 7

Which of these ways can an offer not be accepted?
A) In person
B) By telephone
C) In writing
D) Mere actions
E) Ignoring

Answer 7

E) Ignoring

Question 8

Name a case that an offer was accepted using mere actions.

Answer 8

Lowe vs Clements
Having received that letter, Mr. Lowe had his company go ahead with the delivery of the crane, lowe accepted the offer by delivering the crane.

Question 9

Name a case that an offer was accepted with an I agree button:

Answer 9

Rudder v Microsoft

Question 10

What does Douez vs Facebook argue (terms and conditions)

Answer 10

Legal consent in pressing a button

Question 11

the default rule (emails)

Answer 11

Acceptance occurs at the time of receipt unless otherwise indicated (Christmas v MacKay)

Question 12

Postal Rule

Answer 12

Acceptance is at the time of mailing or posting rather than delivery (Adams v Lindsell)

Question 13

Doctrine of Consideration : hint: think about uncle and nephew case with the RV and honors

Answer 13

the party who seeks to enforce a promise must provide something of value in exchange for the promise.

Question 14

Consideration

Answer 14

benefit to one party or suffering undertaken by the other

Question 15

Doctrine of Promissory Estoppel Hint: think of Susan vs Melody when melody relied on susans promise

Answer 15

If the promisor had made a promise not to claim an interest, and the promisee relied on and acted on the promise he cannot break the promise (used as a defense to doctrine of consideration)

Question 16

Parol Evidence Rule

Answer 16

The rule forbids outside or extrinsic evidence when the document is intended to be the sole source

Question 17

The entire contract clause

Answer 17

the count will determine the parties’ obligations based only on what is recited in the contract itself.

Question 18

Conditions

Answer 18

Very important part of contract, a breach of this can allow the innocent party to terminate the contract (Poussard v Spiers)

Question 19

Warranty

Answer 19

Less importance, a breach does not amount to termination but the innocent party can claim damages. (Bettini v Gye)

Question 20

Effectiveness of Exemption clause

Answer 20

Whether it is part of the contract , and whether the party is aware it is part of the contract. (Rent-a-car vs Clen)

Question 21

Contract voidable

Answer 21

an option available to the innocent party where they either choose to keep the contract in force or set aside the contract

Question 22

Contract void

Answer 22

Where the defect is substantial, the contract has to be declared void the contract considered never to have existed at all.

Question 23

Vitiating factors

Answer 23

Factors that make a contract void or voidable

Question 24

Bisset v Wilkinson (sheep on land)

Answer 24

Opinion and he was in no better position than the purchaser to know about the amount of sheep the land could hold.

Question 25

Opinion

Answer 25

Facts are equally known to both parties

Question 26

Fact (Smith v Land)

Answer 26

If the facts are not equally known to both parties ; the case where smith said that the tenant was desirable but knew the tenant was financially unwell

Question 27

Fraudulent misrepresentation

Answer 27

With intent to mislead or cheat ; damages and rescission

Question 28

Negligent misrepresentation

Answer 28

made carelessly without reasonable grounds to believe what is said is true ; damages and rescission

Question 29

Innocent misrepresentation

Answer 29

Having reasonable grounds to believe what is said is true but is incorrect ; rescission

Question 30

Common mistake (Diamond v BC)

Answer 30

Both parties made the same mistake

Question 31

Mutual mistake : A is selling apple believing that B is buying apple, B is buying apple believing that A is selling bananas

Answer 31

One party meant A and the other party meant B

Question 32

Unilateral mistake

Answer 32

Only one party is mistaken, contract remains unless the non-mistaken party knew of the mistake

Question 33

Doctrine of non est factum (1) (Saunders v Anglia)

Answer 33

There was a difference between the document as it is and the document it is believed to be

Question 34

Doctrine of non est factum (2)

Answer 34

The difference must be fundamentally different

Question 35

Doctrine of non est factum (3)

Answer 35

There was no negligence on the signor’s part

Question 36

What is an exception that a minor would be contract bounded

Answer 36

contract of necessaries and beneficial contracts of service

Question 37

Mental incapacity

Answer 37

intoxicated or illness

Question 38

Duress (Stott v Merit)

Answer 38

Threatened

Question 39

Undue influence

Answer 39

physically pressured (actual pressure) or arised from the relationship (presumed pressure)

Question 40

Actual pressure

Answer 40

the burden of proof lies on the person who is claiming undue influence ex. Stott.

Question 41

Unconscionability

Answer 41

When one party takes advantage of the weakness of another causing that person to enter into an unfair agreement

Question 41

Presumed pressure

Answer 41

burden of proof lies with the person denying undue influence ex. (BMO vs Duguid)

Question 42

Proof of inequality

Answer 42

Inequality could lie in the social status of the being

Question 43

Proof of improvident bargain

Answer 43

Its terms greatly advantaged one party over the other, substantial fairness / grossly unfair