Terms Cases

سؤال 1 of 1

الوقت المتبقي

Match the case to its facts

تطابق النص (انقر واسحب)

(0/0)

تطابق النص
Shogun Finance v Hudson [2004]
ICS v West Bromwich Building Society [1997]
Cherry Tree Investments v Landmain [2013]
Tartsinis v Navona Management [2015]
L'Estrange v Graucob [1934]
Saunders v Anglia Building Society [1970]
Grogan v Robin Meredith Plant Hire [1996]
Parker v South Eastern Railway [1876]
Olley v Marlborough Court Hotel [1949]
Chapleton v Barry UDC [1940]
Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking [1971]
Interfoto Picture Library v Stiletto [1987]
O'Brien v MGN [2001]
McCutcheon v David Macbrayne [1964]
Hutton v Warren [1936]
The Moorcock [1889]
Att General of Belize v Belize Telecom Ltd [2009]
Liverpool CC v Irwin [1976]
Scally v Southern Health and Social Services [1992]
Crossley v Faithful & Gould Holdings Ltd [2004]

انقر واسحب
Dispute over price in sale of shares
Man injured by hired deckchair
Investors receive negligent financial advice
Loaned transparencies kept for extended period of time and billed for
Farmer farms fields but tenancy is terminated prior to harvest
Fraud sells car under hire purchase and finance company comes after purchaser
Bag left in railway cloakroom is lost
Ship is damaged due to bottom of Thames river when mooring
Director of firm suffered nervous breakdown and tendered resignation, so benefits stopped
Too many people win newspaper prize giveaway
Lady staying in hotel has fur coat stolen
Document signed allowing mortgage on house due to deception
Passing on of shares when Belize privatised its telecoms
Violinist injured by mechanical car park
Cafe owner purchases cigarette machine which then breaks
Large tower block kept in state of such disrepair rent strike called
Leasehold property sold and borrower objects to new owner registering
Ferry sinks and customers car is lost
Dr not sufficiently informed of pension options by employer
Employee in contract required to sign administrative document containing additional terms

انقر واسحب
Terms must be on document of contractual significance
Non est factum defence available for those unable to read or comprehend contract
Terms can be implied by custom
Ratio- red hand rule, extra care must be taken
Other evidence is not convincing to change a written contract
Focus on necessity should give way to reasonableness and policy
Obiter - if clause is onerous, extra care must be taken to draw it to attention
Signature binds even if contract not read
Terms can be incorporated through repeat course of dealing
Clauses not unusual do not need to be brought to extra attention
Term must occur before contract is concluded
Courts must do bare minimum to make contract work
No subjective evidence allowed for corrective interpretation
Rectification possible only if parties can demonstrate continuing common interest not reflected in contract
Presumption contract is accurate, excepting errors of writing
Courts can imply terms in law only when necessary
Terms can be incorporated in reasonable care is taken to bring them to attention of other party
Law can imply terms as necessary incidents of a relationship
Signature must be on contractual document to be binding
Judges can imply terms in fact to make contract functional

Terms Cases

سؤال 1 of 1

الوقت المتبقي

Match the case to its facts

تطابق النص (انقر واسحب)

(0/0)

Shogun Finance v Hudson [2004]

ICS v West Bromwich Building Society [1997]

Cherry Tree Investments v Landmain [2013]

Tartsinis v Navona Management [2015]

L'Estrange v Graucob [1934]

Saunders v Anglia Building Society [1970]

Grogan v Robin Meredith Plant Hire [1996]

Parker v South Eastern Railway [1876]

Olley v Marlborough Court Hotel [1949]

Chapleton v Barry UDC [1940]

Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking [1971]

Interfoto Picture Library v Stiletto [1987]

O'Brien v MGN [2001]

McCutcheon v David Macbrayne [1964]

Hutton v Warren [1936]

The Moorcock [1889]

Att General of Belize v Belize Telecom Ltd [2009]

Liverpool CC v Irwin [1976]

Scally v Southern Health and Social Services [1992]

Crossley v Faithful & Gould Holdings Ltd [2004]

Dispute over price in sale of shares

Man injured by hired deckchair

Investors receive negligent financial advice

Loaned transparencies kept for extended period of time and billed for

Farmer farms fields but tenancy is terminated prior to harvest

Fraud sells car under hire purchase and finance company comes after purchaser

Bag left in railway cloakroom is lost

Ship is damaged due to bottom of Thames river when mooring

Director of firm suffered nervous breakdown and tendered resignation, so benefits stopped

Too many people win newspaper prize giveaway

Lady staying in hotel has fur coat stolen

Document signed allowing mortgage on house due to deception

Passing on of shares when Belize privatised its telecoms

Violinist injured by mechanical car park

Cafe owner purchases cigarette machine which then breaks

Large tower block kept in state of such disrepair rent strike called

Leasehold property sold and borrower objects to new owner registering

Ferry sinks and customers car is lost

Dr not sufficiently informed of pension options by employer

Employee in contract required to sign administrative document containing additional terms

Match the case to the point of law established

تطابق النص (انقر واسحب)

(0/0)

Shogun Finance v Hudson [2004]

ICS v West Bromwich

Cherry Tree Investments v Landmain [2013]

Tartsinis v Navona Management Ltd [2015]

L'Estrange v Graucob [1934]

Saunders v Anglia Building Society [1971]

Grogan v Robin Meredith Plant Hire [1996]

Parker v South Eastern Railway Co [1876]

Olley v Marlborough Court Hotel [1949]

Chapleton v Barry UDC [1940]

Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking [1971]

Interfoto v Stiletto [1981]

MGN v O'Brien [2001]

McCutcheon v David MacBrayne [1964]

Hutton v Warren [1936]

The Moorcock [1889]

Att General of Belize v Belize Telecoms Ltd [2009]

Liverpool CC v Irwin [1976]

Scally v Southern Health & Social Services Board [1992]

Crossley v Faithful & Gould Holdings Ltd [2004]

Terms must be on document of contractual significance

Non est factum defence available for those unable to read or comprehend contract

Terms can be implied by custom

Ratio- red hand rule, extra care must be taken

Other evidence is not convincing to change a written contract

Focus on necessity should give way to reasonableness and policy

Obiter - if clause is onerous, extra care must be taken to draw it to attention

Signature binds even if contract not read

Terms can be incorporated through repeat course of dealing

Clauses not unusual do not need to be brought to extra attention

Term must occur before contract is concluded