Louis Litt facilitated a trade where you managed to use $ 750,000 to buy products whose market value was $ 250,000. These products were bought from ATS, which is a company that had links with Louis. In fact, the company paid Louis $ 300,000 for services that were not offered. Unfortunately, ATS managed to close down at the end of June 2016.
Another case is on Daniel Paulsen. He has the power of attorney over the assets of your mother. Nonetheless, he sold your mother’s house for $ 500,000, and gave $ 250,000 to his son Harold, who went on to buy a house and renovate it, which now costs $ 250,000.
Basing on the facts that are identified in this case, there are a number of legal issues that you need to consider, for you to successfully bring a case in court. The following are some of the issues that should be under consideration:
In this case, Louis Litt had extensive influence over the financial affairs of DPA, the company that is managed and owned by Donna, and ATS, where Louis was also an employee. One of the laws that can be used for purposes of addressing the abnormal profits that was made by ATS through the misrepresentation of the prices of software is the 2010 Competition and Consumer Act. Subsection 20 (1) of the act is very clear on issues touching on the misrepresentation of prices. According to this subsection of the act, the law denotes that no person should engage in any unconscionable actions or behavior while engaging in commerce or trade.
Section 21 (1) of the Consumer act further prohibits the engagement of unconscionable trade by business organizations that supply products and goods to other organizations. Moreover, a similar case that can be used to examine the liability of Louis Litt and ATS is on Australian Consumer Commission v Lux Distributors Pty. In this case, the court ruled that it is unacceptable for an individual to use their influence for purposes of convincing another party to buy a product; thus, the plaintiff can seek remedies if the product bought has been misrepresented.
Regarding the position she has on her inheritance, one of the laws that can be used for purposes of determining whether she should claim for a revocation was established in the leading case of Strong v Bird. In this case, the principle established is that, if a testator has gifted a person who is the executor of his will, the principles of equity will hold that gift to be valid. For this rule to hold in a court of law, the testator must have had the intention of ensuring that the gift is irrevocable and immediate. This was the intention of Edith your mother.
By making you the executor as well as the beneficiary of the will, she had the intention of ensuring that you access the gifts immediately, and the process to be irrevocable (Posner, 2014). On this note, Harold will have to return back the $ 250,000 given by his uncle, and this is because the uncle violated his power of attorney by acting on his interests and not that of Edith. Note that, the traditional remedies for issues touching on equity and trust has been damages. For instance, the principles of equity have a notion or a maxim that denotes that any wrong must be followed by a remedy (Pettit, 2012). Damages are a remedial function that reflects the principles of equity. Nonetheless, the Judicature Act of 1875 provides a number of equitable remedies that you can claim. These remedies include rescissions, an account of profits, declarations, specific restitutions and imposition of a constructive trust (Watt, 2013). Nevertheless, you can always claim for a rescission as a remedy for the unconscionable act that Louis did for you.
Note that, it is because of the advice of Louis, that you agreed to buy the software and supplies from ATS for $750,000. This is despite the market value for the products being $ 250,000. A rescission can be sought for purposes of ordering the revocation of the contractual obligation or relationship between Donna and Louis. One of the cases that have set up this principle of rescission is Alati v Kruger. In this case, the court was of the opinion that it is possible for the plaintiff to claim rescission, and this is in case there was a misrepresentation of facts, or a breach of contractual obligations.
Conclusion
Finally, you can claim full rescission, in the case involving you and Harold. Daniel did not have the authority to give $ 250,000 to his son Harold, since it was not the interest of Edith, the mother of Donna. Daniel was acting on the interest of his son and that of himself. Moreover, when it came to your contractual relationship with Louis and ATS, you cannot successfully claim for a rescission, because the company ATS has already been closed. This is a principle that is established in Clark v Dickson.
As per your instruction, you sought to seek an advice on the possible claims that you may have against Louis Litt, ATS and Harold Paulson. Some of the major issues that arise out of your case are:
Whether it is fraud or misrepresentation on the prices of software that were supplied to you by ATS. The market value for the software was $ 250,000, yet the amount of money that you used for the software was $ 750,000.
What sought of remedy you can claim for the misrepresentation of the prices for the products.
Whether there is a claim against Daniel Paulson and his son Harold, for unauthorized use of $ 250,000.
Before having an understanding on the relevant claims that you can bring against the people mentioned, there is a need of understanding various aspects of law, that emanate from their relationship with you, and the applicable laws that you can use to bring a claim against them. Take for example the case of Louis Litt and ATS. By selling for you softwares at $ 750,000, yet the market value for these softwares is $ 250,000, we can assert that an element of fraud and misrepresentation occurs.
Louis had an influence over the purchases and supplies, and he receiving about $ 300,000 from ATS without providing any services, it is possible to assert that the money was used to influence the contract. It is based on these facts that we bring up the concept of unconscionable conduct, and why it is against the law. Note that, a business transaction can be considered as unconscionable, if it is harsh and beyond the commercial bargaining and value that one of the parties to the transaction might get. In this case, you have suffered greatly, because of the great amount of money you have lost, due to the unfair value or purchase price of the supplies you got from ATS.
The supplies coasted you $ 750, 000, yet the actual value of the supplies is $ 250,000. This means that you lost about $ 500,000, which is a significant amount of money. Basing on these facts, it is possible to assert that the transaction was unconscionable, and you can successfully seek a claim under the common law doctrines of equity. One of the laws that you can use for purposes of laying a claim against Louis is Competition and Consumer Act of 2010 s 20 (1).
According to this law, it is prohibited for a person to engage in trade or commerce by behaving in an unconscionable manner. It is this law that Louis Litt managed to breach and this is because he used his influence to order for softwares and supplies whose market value was $ 250,000, but he actually allowed the company to pay $ 750,000. This is unacceptable and uncalled for. Under the common law doctrines of equity, you can claim for a partial rescission. However, that is $ 500,000 against ATS. Nevertheless, it is unfortunate that ATS has been closed, thus you cannot claim for a rescission from the company, and this is based on the principles established in Clark v Dickson.
Note that, the principle of rescission as a remedy for unconscionable acts was reinforced in Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Lux Distributors Pty. Moreover, the concept of equitable fraud occurs in this relationship between you and Louis Litt. This is because Louis received $ 300,000 from ATS without providing any services or products to the company. This is an element of fraud, and you can ask the court to declare the contract you have with Louis to be void, and be restored to you initial position. This is a fact that is supported in the case of Yerkey v Jones.
Finally, in the case of Harold, you can rely on the common law principle that was established in Strong v Bird to lay a claim on the property belonging to your mother. This includes the $ 250,000 that Daniel wrongly gave to his son Harold. Daniel did not have the authority to give any property to his son, because it was not serving the interest of his client Edith. On this note, you can invoke the provisions contained in Vadasz v Pioneer Concrete, to claim the $ 250,000 from Daniel Paulson. Note that, you are only entitled to 4 250,000, since the aim of rescission is to return you to the initial position of the will, which was $ 500,000.
In some case where the plaintiff has committed a bad conduct in that case the defendant may claim doctrine of unclean hands. The doctrine of unclean hands may prevail under some situation the person that is it may be the defendant or the plaintiff has failed to honour the contract agreement. In that case the doctrine may prevail. If the plaintiff has acted dishonestly or has fraudulently this against the nature of the contract, in that case the doctrine of unclean hands may prevail.
If the plaintiff has performed a crime that is in relation with the contract, in that case the doctrine of unclean hands will prevail. If the plaintiff has forced the person to go into contract with him and late comes to court for aid against that person for that same contract, in that case the defendant may claim for doctrine of unclean hands. In case the contract that the plaintiff has gone into has been achieved with violence or committing any fraud, in that case the doctrine of unclean hands could be claimed from the side of the defendant.
Taking example of a Famous case: John Everet Vs Joseph Williams
In the case that John Evert vs. Joseph Williams, were both highway robbers, who entered into a partnership where they robbed highway travellers and split the loot of their robberies. After the looted things were sold and divided, Evert thought that he did not get the fair share of the looted amount and took Williams to the court. As the court came to know about the act of both the parties that the disputed amount that they were talking about was actually an amount of loot. The court dismissed the case and issued warrant against both the parties declaring them guilty.
As the case tells us that in this situation where both the parties are guilty of starting the problem that they want to resolve in court, they will not get any aid from the side of the court. So in order to get any aid or resolution one needs to be free from any wrongful act.
This means that those who seek justice should do justice.
As when a defendant appeals for the doctrine of “clean hands” to cancel the charges that have been brought upon him then the court will see if the plaintiff has performed any misconduct or not and if he has then it needs to be found whether the misconduct is in relation to controversy for which the plaintiff has appealed for.
The court will see if the Plaintiff is engaged in a fraudulent or illegal misconduct more or less in relation to the case or he has performed any misconduct at the end and ants that status quo should be resolved back to the previous situation. If the desired relief and harm the interest of other in that case it can be denied by the court.
The doctrine says that justice is not served by doing any harm to the third party. So if ever there is a situation that by any decision if taken by the court can harm someone in that case the decision will not stand in the court of law.
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
