College aantekeningen
Lecture notes Year 1 Obligations Law (Lecture and PBL Notes)
- Vak
- Instelling
Complete set of Year 1 PBL and Lecture notes combined into 1 document
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 4 van de 130 pagina's
Voorbeeld 4 van de 130 pagina's
In winkelwagen
In winkelwagen
gesponsord bericht van onze partner
Verkoper
Volgen
LawGoose901
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
ObligationsWhat is a (legal) obligation?
A legal relationship between two parties:
o ‘A’ has a duty to do something in respect to ‘B’
o ‘A’s failure to discharge their duty renders them liable for sanction (or remedy)
enforceable in the courts for the benefit of ‘B’
o ‘B’s (legal) right (the adverse of ‘A’s duty) is person:
Personal rights – you can sue them or their representatives in court, eg sue
the person selling the house you wanted to buy, not the person who actually
bought it off them. It is exigible (enforceable) only against ‘A’ and their
representatives
Sources of legal obligations:
Legal fact (circumstances/events which is not intentional conduct)
o Events that entail the creation, modification or transmission of legal rights eg
deliberate Kettling by police can lead to unintended tort of false imprisonment
o Can be an unintended event creating unintended legal effects, or intended events
creating unintended legal effects
o May arise independent of human agency eg storm causes boat to be lost at sea,
cargo never gets delivered
o Includes extinction of legal obligations eg outbreak of war. If you deliver something
to a country you may aid the enemy. The idea of frustration of the contract
Legal acts
o International conduct that (successfully) produces legal effects between the parties
eg marriage/ merging of democrats and Liberals to form Liberal Democrats would
affect membership lists/ merger or acquisition of businesses
The Sources of legal obligations
Contract
o An agreement giving rise to legally enforceable obligations, whose breach the law
provides a remedy eg buying food, insurance contract, mobile phone contract,
getting on a bus
Unjust enrichment
o Enrichment at another’s expense that is unjust without legal justification, for which
the law provides a remedy eg transferring money electronically but getting one of
the numbers wrong and transferring it to someone else. They have been unjustly
enriched
Tort
o A (civil) wrong committed by ‘A’ against ‘B’ for which the law provides a remedy
o Not a breach of contract, nor an unjust enrichment, nor a violation of an equitable
obligation
eg careless breach of duty of care which causes someone harm, negligence
tort of battery – doctors not allowed to touch you for examination without
consent
Further sources of legal obligations
Equitable wrongs – a type of civil wrongs originally recognised by the courts of Equity
Breach of Confidence – (part of equity?)
Statutory obligations – wrongs established by Acts of Parliament eg Health and Safety at
Work Act 1974
,Analysing legal obligations
1. Is there a duty and what is its content? – eg battery: a duty on ‘A’ not to touch ‘B’unlawfully.
The duty stems from the right to self-determination
2. Is there a wrong? – eg negligence: actionable conduct is careless behaviour by ‘A’ that
violates a duty to take care owed to ‘B’
3. Is wrongdoing enough? – eg for liability for breach of contract is strict or actionable per se
4. Whose responsibility? – eg a hospital may be vicariously liable for the negligence of one of
its surgeons
5. Is there a defence? – eg a police officer may not be liable for trespass to land if they are
pursuing a suspect
6. What is the remedy? – eg a sum of money – damages
Civil standard of proof (from PBL)
The party bearing the legal burden (the burden of proof), needs only establish its case on
balance of probabilities (the standard of proof) 1
Some have suggested that there should be varying degrees of standard of proof depending
on the gravity of the misconduct or the severity of the consequences for the parties (such as
in cases imposing sex offender orders). This has been rejected by the House of Lords (In Re B
(Children) [2009] 1 AC 11 Baroness Hale said: ‘Neither the seriousness of the allegation nor
the seriousness of the consequences should make any difference to the standard of proof to
be applied in determining the facts. The inherent probabilities are simply something to be
taken into account, where relevant, in deciding where the truth lies.’)2
The burden of proof is on the claimant
1
Roderick Munday, Evidence (9th Edition Oxford University Press 2017)
2
Roderick Munday, Evidence (9th Edition Oxford University Press 2017)
,Contract law
Summary
Contract Law
Content and
Formation Regulation Enforcement
meaning
Regul Regul Mon Speci
Consid Incor Inter Impli
Agree Inten ating ating etary fic
ment
eratio pora preta catio
n tion form cont reme reme
tion tion n
ation ent dies dies
**See week 4 powerpoint for breakdown of each sub-topic**
What is a contract?
Legally binding agreement
Mutuality – both parties have something to bring
Theories of contract:
Moral theory – contracts are promises
Substantive theory – contracts are consensual obligations
Procedural theory – contracts are agreements formed in accordance with certain
requirements
Functionalist theory – Contracts a e a system of private governance
Are contracts promises?
No, courts will not enforce some promises because they do not see them as enforceable
promises. There must be intention to form legal relations. With family/social arrangements
there generally isn’t an intention
Are contracts mainly about consent?
No, who reads terms and conditions?
No, even if you consent to sell your organs you can’t. Consent does not always create a
contract. Against public policy
There must be consideration – 2 way exchange. A gift invokes consent but is not a contract
, Formation of contract?3
What is a contract?
- An agreement between 2 or more parties which in intended to be legally binding
- The main difference between a contract and a deed is that a deed does not require
consideration, whereas a contract does
3 main requirements: (confirmed in Blue v Ashley [2017] EWHC 1928 (Comm))
1. Agreement
2. Consideration
3. Intention to create legal relations
The elements of contract are judged objectively:
- Smith v Hughes (1870 - 71) LR 6 QB 597 – “whatever his real intention may be, if a
reasonable man would believe that he was assenting to the terms proposed by the other
party and that party upon that belief enters into a contract with him”
2 types of contract:
1. Bilateral – involves a promisor and a promisee. A reciprocal arrangement between two
parties who promise to perform an exchange
2. Unilateral – involves only a promisor. These contracts are often only completed by an act,
such as returning a lost dog for a reward. The person who found the dog did not enter into a
contract with the promisor before they found the dog
1. Agreement
- Means the parties have agreed on the terms of the contract
- Objective test to test if there was an agreement (eg how would the reasonable person have
interpreted for example a statement made by one of the parties? Would they see it as an
offer?) - Smith v Hughes (1870 - 71) LR 6 QB 597
- Agreement can be broken down into a 2 part analytical model to attempt to show whether
an agreement has been reached. These parts are Offer and Acceptance
Offer
- Expression of willingness to contract made with the intention that this will become legally
binding on the offeror as soon as it is accepted by the offeree
- Needs to be clear and unequivocal statement of the offerors intention to be bound by
certain terms
- Offers don’t usually have to be made in any particular form. Can usually be made orally, in
writing or by conduct (exception to this rule is deeds, which must be written. Deeds are used
especially for land)
Offers must satisfy the following:
- Must set out or refer to terms on which the offeror is willing to contract with the offeree
- These terms must be sufficiently certain (clear and broad enough to form the basis of an
enforceable contract)
- The offer must give indication that the offeror intends to be bound, without negotiation, as
soon as the offer is accepted by the offeree
3
Contract law, Arvind, T. T. Oxford University Press 2017 Part I
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper LawGoose901. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €7,86. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 76710 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 14 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen