Summary
Jack faces multiple legal issues with his furniture removal business. Abdul can claim a refund for the failed service unless a force majeure clause applies. The availability of the second lorry doesnt change the legal situation. Jack may terminate the lease under the doctrine of frustration if access to the mill is essential. Compensation for shelving is challenging. Bob might struggle to claim costs for dry rot and boiler repairs due to no property survey. Misrepresentation could be considered if Kathy knew of the issues. Bellas verbal rent reduction agreement with Phil is legally binding but hard to prove without written evidence. Bella could argue Phils demand for back rent is unjust enrichment.Full Conversation
location: UK.
As per UK law:
*. For (a), Abdul can claim a refund as Jack failed to fulfill the contract. However, an exception may apply if there's a force majeure clause in their contract.
*. For (b), the availability of the second lorry doesn't change the situation legally.
*. For (c), Jack can potentially terminate the lease under the doctrine of frustration if access to the mill is essential to the lease. Compensation for the shelving might be challenging.
*. During negotiations prior to purchasing Kathy’s eighteenth century cottage,
Bob was told by Kathy, ‘It’s a bargain at only £*,*. It is in great condition
for its age and I have never had to spend a great deal of money on its
maintenance’. Bob purchased the cottage for £*,*. He has now
discovered that there is dry rot, which will cost £*,* to repair, and that
three days after Kathy made the above statement to him, the boiler broke
down. It will need repairing at a cost of £*,*.
Did Bob have a survey conducted on the property before the purchase? This information is important to determine if he could have a case for misrepresentation against Kathy.
no
As per UK law:
*. Bob might face difficulties in claiming for the dry rot and boiler repair costs as he didn't conduct a property survey before purchase.
*. Misrepresentation might be considered if he can prove that Kathy was aware of the issues but failed to disclose them.
Phil is the landlord of a shopping centre. Bella is one of the tenants, running a
Delicatessen and paying rent of £*,* per month. The lease has ten more
years to run. Phil then rents a shop in the centre to Cora, a rival Delicatessen.
As a result of the competition between the two shops, Bella’s profits fall by
*%. At a meeting between Bella and Phil, Bella expresses her anger that Phil
has rented a shop to a rival and says ‘You have ruined my business, unless I
can get a rent reduction, I will have to close the shop. It’s up to you’.
Phil, after considering the request informs Bella ‘ You are overreacting but
you have been a good tenant and it would be difficult for me to find a
replacement as good as you, so I will cut your rent to £*,* a month until
your profits get back to the level before Cora moved in’.
Bella pays £*,* per month for the next six months. Her profits do
improve, but not to the pre-Cora level. Bella then receives a letter from Phil which states ‘ I have reconsidered the
position and I have now decided that from next month, you must pay the full
£*,* rent and also *% of the £*,* you have underpaid us during the
last six months.
Advise Bella who wishes to continue to pay £*,* per month.
Did Bella and Phil put their agreement of rent reduction in writing?
no
As per UK law:
*. Verbal agreements can be legally binding. However, it might be hard for Bella to prove the agreement without written proof.
*. Bella could argue that Phil's demand for back rent is unjust enrichment.
TRY ME!
Start a new chat