Contract Enforceability Scenarios

Summary

Brief Summary: In the scenario where Roger mows Sadiqs lawn without prior agreement, Sadiqs promise to pay is likely unenforceable due to lack of initial offer and consideration, as seen in Re McArdle [1951]. Thierrys promise to pay Ursula for trimming hedges is enforceable, meeting all contract elements, similar to Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co [1893]. The universitys offer to pay Wade for withdrawing a lawsuit threat is enforceable if the threat is genuine, aligning with Williams v Roffey Bros [1990]. XaXas promise to pay Yolanda for extra police watch is enforceable, as in Glasbrook Bros v Glamorgan County Council [1925]. Professor Zens agreement to clap for payment is enforceable, supported by Chappell & Co Ltd v Nestle Co Ltd [1960].

Full Conversation

) Thierry promises to pay Ursula Ksh *,* in exchange for Ursula’s promise to trim all Victor’s hedges. Advise whether a contract is enforceable under any of the following alternative circumstances: use irac rule and a relevant case law

Alright, let’s break this down using the IRAC rule:

Issue:
Is the promise by Thierry to pay Ursula Ksh *,* enforceable as a contract?

Rule:
For a contract to be enforceable, it must have:
*. Offer
*. Acceptance
*. Consideration
*. Intention to create legal relations

Application:
- Offer: Thierry offers to pay Ursula Ksh *,*.
- Acceptance: Ursula accepts the offer by promising to trim Victor’s hedges.
- Consideration: Thierry’s promise to pay Ksh *,* and Ursula’s promise to perform the service both constitute valid consideration.
- Intention: Both parties appear to have the intention to create legal relations.

Case Law:
In the case of Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co [*] * QB *, an advertisement promising to pay money upon the performance of certain acts was held to be an enforceable contract, showing that such promises can create binding contracts.

Conclusion:
Thierry's promise to pay Ursula Ksh *,* is likely enforceable as a contract, provided all the elements are satisfied.
Do youhave any additional details or questions about this scenario?

Wade has failed his biology degree. Despite legal advice that the claim cannot succeed, Wade threatens to sue the university in negligence as he believes poor teaching caused him to fail. The University says it will pay Wade Ksh *,* if he withdraws his threatAdvise whether a contract is enforceable under any of the following alternative circumstances:use irac rule and a relevant case law

Issue:
Is the promise by the university to pay Wade Ksh *,* enforceable as a contract if Wade withdraws his threat to sue?

Rule:
For a contract to be enforceable, it must have:
*. Offer
*. Acceptance
*. Consideration
*. Intention to create legal relations

Application:
- Offer: The university offers Ksh *,*.
- Acceptance: Wade's withdrawal of his threat to sue serves as acceptance.
- Consideration: Wade’s forbearance (not suing) can be considered valid consideration.
- Intention: Both parties seem to intend to create legal relations.

Case Law:
In the case of Williams v Roffey Bros [*] * WLR *, a promise to pay extra money to ensure completion of a contract was held enforceable due to the practical benefit received.

Conclusion:
The contract is likely enforceable as all elements are satisfied, assuming the threat to sue was genuine and not frivolous.
Do you have more details or another scenario to discuss?

XaXa promises Yolanda, the village police constable, Ksh *,* if she keeps a special watch on her cottage while XaXa is on holiday. Advise whether a contract is enforceable under any of the following alternative circumstancesuse irac law with relevant case law

Let's break this down using the IRAC rule:
Issue: Is XaXa's promise to pay Yolanda Ksh *,* enforceable as a contract?
Rule: For a contract to be enforceable, it must have:
*. Offer
*. Acceptance
*. Consideration
*. Intention to create legal relations
Application:
- Offer: XaXa offers to pay Ksh *,* for Yolanda's service.
- Acceptance: Yolanda accepts by agreeing to provide the service.
- Consideration: XaXa's promise to pay and Yolanda’s service both constitute valid consideration.
- Intention: Both parties intend to create legal relations.
Case Law: In *Glasbrook Bros v Glamorgan County Council [*] AC **, a promise to pay for additional police protection was held enforceable as the police provided extra services beyond their public duty.
Conclusion: XaXa's promise to pay Yolanda Ksh *,* is likely enforceable as a contract since all necessary elements are satisfied.
Do you have any additional scenarios or questions about this situation?

Professor Zen’s contract requires him to ‘clap loudly’ as each student is presented for their degree at graduation. Before the graduation ceremony Professor Zen promises a student’s father that he will clap loudly in exchange for the father’s promise to pay Professor Zen Ksh *,*. Advise whether a contract is enforceable under any of the following alternative circumstances:use irac law

Let's break this down using the IRAC rule:
Issue: Is the promise by the student's father to pay Professor Zen Ksh *,* enforceable as a contract?
Rule: For a contract to be enforceable, it must have:
*. Offer
*. Acceptance
*. Consideration
*. Intention to create legal relations
Application:
- Offer: The student's father offers Ksh *,*.
- Acceptance: Professor Zen accepts by promising to clap loudly.
- Consideration: The father's promise to pay Ksh *,* and Professor Zen's promise to clap loudly both constitute valid consideration.
- Intention: Both parties appear to have the intention to create legal relations.
Case Law: In *Chappell & Co Ltd v Nestle Co Ltd [*] AC **, consideration was deemed valid even if it was not economically adequate, as long as it was something of value.
Conclusion: The promise by the student's father to pay Professor Zen Ksh *,* is likely enforceable as a contract, provided all elements are satisfied.
Do you have any additional details or questions about this scenario?

Contract Enforceability Scenarios

Summary

Full Conversation

Related Chats