AIZAN ROXANE/ BONI INA-MARYSE/ TOURE MABERE / WANDO MARIE-GRACE

BUSA 2106 Business Law

Dr Paladan Nerisa

Thursday, October 08th 2015

September 2015

CASE STUDY 1 CHAPTER 10, 12, 13

Instructions:

1. Create a group that is compose of 3 to 4 members. Take note that there will be
four groups with 4 members and 2 groups with 3 members. All students must be in
a group if not I will make a re-grouping.

2. The case for chapter 10 is the case# 2- Agreement on page 256, for chapter 11
is the case#2 -Consideration on page 267 and for chapter 12 is case #3 -
Intoxication on page 285.

3. Make a summary of each case and answer the questions at the end of the case.
The format of your case should be: for example: Case Study - Chapter 10,
Summary and Answer to the questions.

4. Each group will do all the cases.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-Chapter 10, Summary and Answer to the questions

-Chapter 11, Summary and Answer to the questions

-Chapter 12, summary and Answer to the questions

Case study 2 Agreement P256

Agreement above all is a manifestation by 2 or more persons of the substance of the contract.
And in order to have a contract, we should have an offer and an acceptance. In the offer, there
should have objective intend definite terms and communication to the offeree. And also many
way to accept the offer and by this we can conclude that the contract is made so it is over. So
according to what we saw on the book, we can say that there is no contract between Mr.
McLaughlin and Mr. After McLaughlin has submitted the written offers to purchase the
parcels, Heikkila decided to change the price of all the three parcels and also the closing dates
without concerting Mr. McLaughlin and this is not legal. In consequence of that behavior
from Heikkila, McLaughlin decided not to sign the purchase agreements to accept the
changes so the contract cannot be valid.

Case 2 Chapter 11

The case 2 is talking about consideration. Something of legal value has been given in
exchange for a promise. In fact, Belty agreed that if Clyde would devote full time to KFC
franchise, they would operate the business as a jourt enterprise end share equally in the
ownership of as assets and divide as returns equally. So Clyde decided to terminate his tire
business and devoted his full time to the KFC franchise. The agreement made by both of
them was an oral agreement so less enforceable. So to respond to the question to know if the
agreement is enforceable, we may dearly say no the agreement is not enforceable because the
promise made by Belty did lack of consideration being an illusory promise. Indeed Belty
decided not perform her contractual obligation.

Case 3 Chapter 12

Intoxicated person is a person who is affected mentally or emotionally by a substance that

intoxicates drunk inebriated alcohol or drugs. The absorption of alcohol affects behavior, the
actions of the person who consumes. In case, that person becomes alcoholic, means he is
constantly under the effect of alcohol or drugs and he is always in a second being that person
becomes incapable of making correct decisions due to condition of his intoxicated. While,
intoxicated person is not occur a contract by courts because he is considered incapable of
making fair decisions. To regain his ability or his right to contract agreement that person must
receive court approval after a passage in a detox center, like on example of Betty Galloway
page 285. Also according to the situation, we can say that Betty Galloway is the winner
because she was declared incompetent to handle her person and her affairs by the court. Even
if her husband affirmed that she was lucid when she was signing the contract, his statement
cannot be considered as his wifes decision could be affected by the imbalance caused by the
presence of alcohol on his body over a long period.