商务契约关系

1、SchoolofOverseasEducation,SichuanUniversityHigherNationalDiplomaBusinessContractualRelationship(F84N34)Outcome1 riginalorkStatementIherebycertifythatmypaperisanoriginalworkthathasnotbeenpublishedelsewhereanddoesnotcontainanycopyrightedmaterialwhichisreproducedwithoutpermissionoftheoriginalowner.Sign

2、ature:TOC o 1-5 h z HYPERLINK l bookmark4 1.Introduction2 HYPERLINK l bookmark6 .Contractofsale2.RejectgoodsandReturnit3 HYPERLINK l bookmark8 .aThemistakeofthesalesassistant4 HYPERLINK l bookmark10 .bTheshopserror4 HYPERLINK l bookmark12 .aConsumerCreditAct5 HYPERLINK l bookmark14 .bJointliability5

3、.Thedamageprotection6.Conclusion7 HYPERLINK l bookmark16 Reference8.IntroductionThisreportanalysesthecaseandcustomercanprotecthislegalrightsaccordingtolaw.ContractofsaleWecandefinedsalethat“acontractinwhichthesellertransfersoragreestotransferthepropertyingoodstothebuyerforamoneyconsideration,calledt

4、heprice.”(SQA,2014)Acontractofsaleincludesaleandagreementtosell.“Wherethesellercantransferthegoodimmediately,andiswillingandabletodoso,thereisasale.”“wherethereissomesortofconditionthatmustbefulfilledorsomeacthastobecarriedoutbeforethesalecantakeplace,thereisaagreementtosell.”(SQA,2014)TheValidityFa

5、ctorsofcontractofsale:(!)Aminorityofcontractshavetobemadeinaparticularforms.(2)Contractmadenotbyduressorbymistake.(3)Somepersonsonlyhavelimitedcapacitytoenterintocontract.(4)Contractmustbecompletedandpreciseinitsterms.(5)Mustnotbeillegal,immoralorcontrarytopublicpolicy.(SQA,2013)Inthecase,theorigina

6、lpriceofthelaptopis599.99.ButJohnspeakwithasaleinthestore,heagreetoreducereduce100.SoJohnspent499.99tobuyalaptopfromMegaTechElectronics.Then,Johnobtainedtheownershipofthelaptop.SoJohnputforwardaoffertothestore,thenthestoretoaccepttheoffer.Theyreachedaconsensus.Johnandthestoreenteredintoa“contractofs

7、ale”.RejectgoodsandReturnitYes,Johncanrejectthelaptopandreturnittotheshop.First,Johnslaptopisinablackcasing,buthetoldtheassistanthewanttogetawhitemodel.Thisviolatedthesection11ofConsumerRightsAct2015.Everycontracttosupplygoodsbydescriptionistobetreatedasincludingatermthatthegoodswillmatchthedescript

8、ion.(TheNationalArchives,2015)Second,Johnslaptophasalargescratchonthescreen,andhislaptopmissingkeysonthekeyboard.Thisisaqualityproblem.Johncanrejectthelaptopandreturnittotheshop,accordingtothesection9inConsumerRightsAct2015.Everycontracttosupplygoodsistobetreatedasincludingatermthatthequalityofthego

9、odsissatisfactory.(TheNationalArchives,2015)InthecaseofRoberts&CovYule(1896),machinerymerchantsdescribedhisfour-gas-engineneed4710stospentonworkingorder.Butthepurchasersfoundthatitis5510s.Thecountheldthatthebuyerswereentitledtorejecttheengine.(SQA,2014).ThiscasecansupportJohnrejectthelaptopandreturn

10、ittotheshop.aThemistakeofthesalesassistantNo,thesalesassistantmadeamistake.Thenormalruleswouldapplytosalegoodsandifthegoodsareofareasonablequalityetc,consumerknowthegoodssituationorthesellerwouldbeentitledtotherefuseofthepurchasepricebecausethebuyerhadsimplychangedhisorhermind.(SQA,2014)Inthecase,sa

11、leassistantdidnottoldJohnaboutthelaptopproblemsbeforehebuythelaptop.Johndidnotknowthislaptophassomeproblem.Thisviolatedthesection14ofConsumerRightsAct2015(TheNationalArchives,2015).Sotheshopshouldrefundjohnorreplacethelaptopforhim.bTheshopserrorThesection20oftheUnfairContractTermsAct1977,coversattem

12、ptstoexcludeorrestrictliabilityinrelationtoimpliedtermsinCRA2015.Thoseclausesarevoidinaconsumercontract.(SQA,2014)Inthecase,johnboughtalaptopintheshop.ThereisaconsumercontractbetweenJohnandtheshop.Iftheshoprelyonthesignaboutnotgivingrefundsorreplacements,theshopviolatetheUnfairContractTermsAct1977.S

13、otheycannotdothat.aConsumerCreditActYes,Johncanbeprotectedthroughjointliability,accordingtoConsumerCreditAct1974.Inthecase,becauseJohnusedacreditcardwhenheboughtthelaptop.SoJohn,theshopandthecreditcardcompanyrespectivelybecomeadebtor,supplierandcreditor.Thisisadebtor-creditor-supplieragreement.Debto

14、r-creditor-supplieragreement:Wherethecreditorisalsothesupplierofthegoods.Intheseagreementswheregoodsorservicescostmorethan100orlessthan30000thedebtorcanholdthecreditorjointlyandseverallyliablewithsupplierwhenheclaimsmisrepresentationorbreachofcontractagainstthesupplier-knownas“connectedlenderliabili

15、ty”.(SQA,2014)Inthecase,thelaptopis499.99,sotheagreementiseffective.Thesection75inConsumerCreditAct1974boththesupplierandthecreditorarejointlyandseverallyliableinrespectofanybreachofcontact.(SQA,2014).bJointliabilityIfpartieshavejointliability,thentheyareeachliableuptothefullamountoftherelevantoblig

16、ation.Ifthereisbreachofcontract,thecreditorandthesuppliercantberuledout,JohncanSuesuppliersandcreditors.ThedamageprotectionYes,AnnaisprotectedbylegislationaccordingtoConsumerProtectionAct1987.Dutyofcare:alegalobligationwhichisimposedonanindividualrequiringadherencetoastandardofreasonablecarewhileper

17、forminganyactsthatcouldforeseeablyharmothers.(SQA,2014)Inthecase,Annaslaptopspontaneouscombustion,andburnedhisfingersandtable.SothecompanyhasadutyofcareforAnna.Strictproductliabilityisindicatingtotheliabilityofallthepartiesamongtheprocessionofmanufacturingaproductfordamagescausedbytheproduct.(SQA,20

18、14)Inthecase,alaptopsspontaneouscombustioncausedAnniepropertyandpersonalinjury.SothestorehasliabilityforAnna.Theonusofproof:Consumershavetoprovethattheproductcausedhisinjuryandthathewasusingtheproductatthetimeoftheincidentinanormalmanner.(SQA,2014)Thestoremaybedodefenseforhimself,accordingtotheonusofproof.ButAnnaisreallynormaluseherlaptops.AndThisincidentcausedpersonalinjuryan