Exam
(elaborations)P
[Date]
VL3702
Assignment 2
(COMPLETE
ANSWERS)
Semester 1
2024 - DUE 9
April 2024•
Course•
Law of
Contract -
PVL3702
(PVL3702)•
Institution•
billclinton tindi
[COMPANY NAME]
University Of
,Exam (elaborations)
PVL3702 Assignment 2 (COMPLETE ANSWERS)
Semester 1 2024 - DUE 9 April 2024
Course
Law of Contract - PVL3702 (PVL3702)
Institution
University Of South Africa (Unisa)
Book
The Law of Contract in South Africa
PVL3702 Assignment 2 (COMPLETE ANSWERS) Semester 1 2024 - DUE
9 April 2024 ;100% TRUSTED workings, explanations and solutions. for
assistance Whats-App.......0.6.7..1.7.1..1.7.3.9 .........
. Question 1 Answer saved Marked out of 1.00 Flag question Question text
Gary points a loaded gun at Pete, and orders him to sign a written contract.
Gary explains that the document is for the sale of Pete’s car to him (Gary),
at a price of R50 000 which is far below the market value of the car. Pete,
fearing for his life, signs the document. Which cause of action is Pete most
likely to pursue against Gary, to have the contract set aside? 1. Duress. 2.
Undue Influence. 3. Commercial bribery. 4. Material Mistake. 5.
Reasonable Mistake. Clear my choice
Pete is most likely to pursue the cause of action for Duress to have the contract set aside.
Question 2 Answer saved Marked out of 1.00 Flag question Question text
X has a watch that Y likes. X offers to sell her watch to Y for R5 000, and X
and Y agree that X’s offer will be open for acceptance until 1 June. This is a
case of 1. a pre-emption contract formed bilaterally. 2. an option contract
formed bilaterally. 3. an option contract formed unilaterally. 4. an option and
pre-emption contract formed bilaterally. 5. a pre-emption contract formed
unilaterally. Disclaimer Extreme care has been used to create this
document, however the contents are provided “as is” without any
representations or warranties, express or implied. The author assumes no
,liability as a result of reliance and use of the contents of this document.
This document is to be used for comparison, research and reference
purposes ONLY. No part of this document may be reproduced, resold or
transmitted in any form or by any means. Clear my choice
This scenario represents an option contract formed unilaterally.
Question 3 Answer saved Marked out of 1.00 Flag question Question text
Jack is engaged to Jill. Jack has a very strong personality and eventually
persuades Jill to sell and transfer her (Jill’s) house that is worth R900 000
to him (Jack) at a purchase price of a mere R50 000. After registration of
the property in Jack’s name, he breaks off the engagement. Which option
below has the LEAST amount of relevance, in relation to the cause of
action that Jill is likely to rely on in her pursuit to have the transfer of the
house into Jack’s name set aside? 1. Proof that there was an erosion of
Jill’s ability to exercise a free and independent judgment at the time of
contracting with Jack. 2. Proof that Jack used his superior position to
undermine the will of Jill. 3. Proof that Jack and Jill were in a close
relationship at the time of concluding their sale agreement. 4. Proof that
Jack applied improper pressure on Jill which amounted to intimidation. 5.
Proof that Jill was improperly induced to conclude the contract with Jack.
Clear my choice
Option 3, proof that Jack and Jill were in a close relationship at the time of
concluding their sale agreement, has the LEAST amount of relevance in relation
to the cause of action that Jill is likely to rely on.
Question 4 Answer saved Marked out of 1.00 Flag question Question text
X finds himself stranded in a remote area when his motor vehicle breaks
down. There is no cell phone reception in the area. After five days have
passed without seeing anyone, Y comes along and offers to tow X to the
nearest town for the exorbitant fee of R20 000. X is upset that Y wants to
charge such an excessive amount, but X eventually accepts Y’s offer. X
refuses to pay Y R20 000 after being towed to the town. A reasonable fee
, for towing would have been R5 000, but Y claims the full amount of R20
000 from X. Regarding this factual scenario, which statement is
CORRECT? 1. There was no consensus between X and Y to conclude a
contract for R20 000. Disclaimer Extreme care has been used to create this
document, however the contents are provided “as is” without any
representations or warranties, express or implied. The author assumes no
liability as a result of reliance and use of the contents of this document.
This document is to be used for comparison, research and reference
purposes ONLY. No part of this document may be reproduced, resold or
transmitted in any form or by any means. 2. This is a case dealing with an
unconscionable exploitation of an emergency situation. 3. Based on Y’s
conduct, this is a case of commercial bribery. 4. Y fraudulently
misrepresented his exorbitant fee charge of R20 000. 5. This factual
scenario deals with pacta de contrahendo. Clear my choice
Option 2 is correct: This is a case dealing with an unconscionable exploitation of
an emergency situation
Question 5 Answer saved Marked out of 1.00 Flag question Question text
X, an organiser of art exhibitions, contracted with Y for an exhibition to be
held on 24 to 27 July. These dates were the only dates mentioned during
the negotiations. After having been pressurised by X, Y hurriedly signed the
standard form contract without reading it. The contract contained a clause
permitting X to change the dates of the exhibition unilaterally. X was aware
of this clause, but Y was not. Thereafter, X changed the dates. X had no
reason to believe that Y would have signed the contract if he had known of
the term. This is a case of 1. an error in persona. 2. a non-material mistake.
3. an error in negotio. 4. a reasonable mistake. 5. a material error and an
error in negotio. Clear my choice
This scenario is a case of a material error and an error in negotio.
