There are two issues involved:
Relevant Law
There are several ways in which business can be carried on in Australia, for instance, by a company, sole trade ship, trust or by partnership. Partnership is a form of business which can be carried on with the help of more than one person who are sharing common motive/intention while carrying on the business activity with the sole intent to share the earned profit and losses amongst themselves. These are the core elements required for partnership formation and are held in (Wang v Rong, 2015). (Lawyers 2017)
The persons who form the partnership are the partners and as per (Re Agriculturist Cattle Insurance Co, 1870), they are agents of each other and the form, that is, an act by one will bind the others and the firm. (Egert 2007)
Every partner must duly cater their duties, that is they must not make any secret profits, avoid conflicting interest, must act fiduciary, etc. if any agent exceeds his authority then it is nothing but an act of breach of duty and he can be thus held personally liable for the loss that is incurred by the firm because of such excessive use of authority.
The agents carry on the acts for the firm within the power which is attributed to them. This attribution of power can be in two manners, that is, firstly, actual authority which is delegated to the agents of the firm directly by the firm itself and is evaluated in (Hely-Hutchinson v Brayhead Ltd , 1968). This can be done by the firm wither in written or oral form called the express authority or by implication called the implied authority;
Secondly, apparent authority is a kind of authority wherein a presumption is raised by the third party that the person with whom he is dealing is the agent of the firm. The presumption is raised based on the representation made by the agent of the firm clarifying that such person has the power to enter into contract on behalf of the firm. Thus, any contract amid the third party and such representative is valid and is bind upon the firm provided the third party is acting in good faith and is held in (Freeman & Lockyer (A Firm) v Buckhurst Park Properties (Mangal) Ltd , 1964). (Latimer 2012)
Application of law
The law is now applied.
But, lance exceeded his authority and enters into a contract with Lynton who was the sale person of Mighty Motors, He bought a uite @ $25,000. At this stage it is submitted that since Lance has undertaken a contract beyond his authority thus, the same must be non enforceable.
But, Lynton is aware of the Herbal business and its three partners but there was no where mentioned that Lance authority to bind the business is only up to $ 20,000. Thus, by not making any disclosure, a representation is made by the firm based upon which Lynton has entered into a contract with Lance. Thus, Lance has assumed an apparent authority and the contract made by him for worth @$25,000 is valid and is enforceable.
Conclusion
Lynton has full power to hold Herbal liable for the contr5act made by Lance as the contract was valid under the apparent authority of Lance and Lynton was acting in good faith. Also, Lance is held personally liable and is accountable to the firm and other partners.
In order to provide protection to the consumers there is Australian Consumer Law that is framed. The consumers are entitled to sue the manufacturer or the supplier if any of the provisions of the Act is not comply with. (Corones 2012)
Every manufacture is obligated to act not in deceptive or misleading manner while dealing in commerce and trade and if he does then the same is the breach of section 18 of the Act. in (Commercial Bank of Australia v Amadio , 1983), the acts are held to be deceptive and misleading resulting the contract unenforceable in nature.
When the party who is dominant position takes advantage of the position of the inferior to his own gain, then the acts are considered to be unconscionable in nature as per section 20 of the Act. The party is held to be inferior as he lacks knowledge, age, literacy, soundness of mind etc. Any representation by the seller which is not true and which results in misleading the consumer are not permitted as per section 29 of the Act.
When false and misleading statements are made regarding the characteristic, style, quality of the product the same is violation of section 33-34 of the Act.
Application of law
Conclusion
Lance acts are unconsiousable in nature and thus Saqlaim can terminate the contract. the clai by Xiaojing is breach of section 17, 29, 33 and 34 and thus consumers can bring an action against Xiaojing.
Is Xiaozing liable to pay extra $100 which is promised by her to Felix?
When an offer is communicated by an offeror to an offeree which is approved by the offeree then it is an agreement. The parties are required to be capable and must possess legal intention. The agreement should be hold along with some value called consideration to make it legal and enforceable. (Latimer 2012)
The promises when made by the offeror and the offeree should be supported with some value (monetary or non monetary) so that the promises are enforced by the parties in law and such value is called consideration and is held in (Chappel v Nestle , 1960). Consideration must be adequate regardless it is sufficient or not. Any agreement not supported with consideration makes the contract gratuitous and is held in (Coulls v Bagots Executor & Trustee Co Ltd, 1967).
But, as per (Roscorla v Thomas , 1842), only those considerations are valid which are made against the promises of future or present. Consideration of past promises are irrelevant and of no significance. As per (Pao On v Lau Yiu Long , 1980), past consideration are held to be good when the acts are done with an understanding that the same will be later reimbursed.
Application of law
Felix is a major of 20 years. He is employed by Xiaojing as casual pick lavender. So, there is a valid contract that is made amid Xiaojing and Felix wherein Xiaojing is paying $25 to Felix for his work. Thus, the consideration that supports their contract is $25.
Later, a promise is made by Xiaojing wherein it was stated that she was so happy with the work of Felix done by him yesterday of clearing the garden beds, that, an extra $100 will be paid to Felix by her.
Now, this promise is against the work which is already undertaken by Felix. So, the consideration of $100 is for the promise which was past in nature as thus as per (Roscorla v Thomas , 1842), the same is invalid.
However, at times past considerations are considered to be valid and by applying the law in (Pao On v Lau Yiu Long , 1980), if the acts that are undertaken by Felix is because on the promise made by Xiaojing, then, the promise by Xiaojing is valid and is enforceable in law.
Conclusion
Xiaojing has made the promise for an act which was already performed by Felix. Thus, the consideration which was given by Xiaojing is for a past act and thus is not valid in nature.
Reference List
Books/Articles/Journals
Stephen Corones. (2012). The Australian Consumer Law. Lawbook Company.
Paul Latimer. (2012). Australian Business Law 2012. CCH Australia Limited.
Case laws
Chappel v Nestle (1960).
Commercial Bank of Australia v Amadio (1983).
Coulls v Bagots Executor & Trustee Co Ltd (1967).
Freeman & Lockyer (A Firm) v Buckhurst Park Properties (Mangal) Ltd (1964).
Hely-Hutchinson v Brayhead Ltd (1968).
Pao On v Lau Yiu Long (1980).
Re Agriculturist Cattle Insurance Co (1870).
Roscorla v Thomas (1842).
Wang v Rong (2015).
Online Material
Egert, G. (2007). Defining a Partnership: The Traditional Approach. Retrieved November 23, 2018, from https://epublications.bond.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1332&context=blr
Lawyers, P. (2017). partnership Dispute. Retrieved November 23, 2018, from Partnership dispute: Wang v Rong [2015] NSWSC 1419: https://www.pcclawyers.com.au/news-centre/265-wang-v-rong-2015-nswsc-1419.
Essay Writing Service Features
Our Experience
No matter how complex your assignment is, we can find the right professional for your specific task. Contact Essay is an essay writing company that hires only the smartest minds to help you with your projects. Our expertise allows us to provide students with high-quality academic writing, editing & proofreading services.
Free Features
Free revision policy
$10Free bibliography & reference
$8Free title page
$8Free formatting
$8How Our Essay Writing Service Works
First, you will need to complete an order form. It's not difficult but, in case there is anything you find not to be clear, you may always call us so that we can guide you through it. On the order form, you will need to include some basic information concerning your order: subject, topic, number of pages, etc. We also encourage our clients to upload any relevant information or sources that will help.
Complete the order form
Once we have all the information and instructions that we need, we select the most suitable writer for your assignment. While everything seems to be clear, the writer, who has complete knowledge of the subject, may need clarification from you. It is at that point that you would receive a call or email from us.
Writer’s assignment
As soon as the writer has finished, it will be delivered both to the website and to your email address so that you will not miss it. If your deadline is close at hand, we will place a call to you to make sure that you receive the paper on time.
Completing the order and download