Business Law

Business Law

Scenario 1

Natural phenomenons are rarely reflected within any business or legal engagements. Due to such an observation, it would be paramount to understand that in regard to business transactions both parties must not conceal any information (Bales, 1999; Beitz,2009). For instance, the scenario involving the university and the Speedy Coach denies the university any rights and obligations. The argument can be based on the fact that, the bus company has no indirect or direct control of the weather. Given that the storm s an act of God and it had prepared to honor its obligations, the university in this case could not have compelled the Speedy Coach to act on their behave. Since they had entered into a contractual agreement, Speedy Coach failed to deliver because of unavoidable circumstances (Hohfeld, 2000; Weimer, 2009; Slater,1911). Thus the university the university cannot accuse Speedy Coach of any wrong doing since it could not have managed to overcome the extensive mudslides along parts of the road up to Cameron Highlands. The road was no longer accessible and this explains why Speedy Coach refused to proceed with the coach journey on the departure date. Looking at the scope of rights and obligations, the university could have on relied with the next date by which the roads could have become passable or request a refund at a discounted rate since the Speedy Coach had not failed them but he weather. Thus as regards the scope and extent of rights and obligations, the university had a right to request for a refund and its obligation is tied to the contractual agreements it had entered with the Speedy Coach as regards the botched journey. Since, it had not paid the journey in full, Speedy Coach cannot demand any further payments from the university.

In scenario 2 the organizers have a duty and an obligation towards al those who had paid for the projected exhibition. Since the electrical faults are not specified if they are as a result of human or natural error, the organizers are thus compelled to understand that they have an obligation to meet the needs of those who had paid (Kelsen, 1999; Motilal, 2011). This right and obligation is etched on the fact that they had promised initially promised to deliver and this was not the case. Thus, by offering an alternative, this could not be satisfactory since the clients had paid for the exhibition not a walk around the tea farm or the museum. From the scope of offer and acceptance, it is evident the exhibition organizers had entered into agreement with all those who had paid to participate, thus,the the organizers are in this case compelled to respect rights as well as obligations of the participants since they can in one way or the other be enforceable at law (American Law Institute,1936; Hohfeld, 1946). This can ascertained from the facts. That is why the concept of offer and acceptance plays a pivotal role here. The electrical failure cannot be accepted by participants since the organizers could have looked for alternatives sources of power to make progress with their arrangements. It is on such objectives that the organizers ought to understand that they are bound by offer to respect the tenets established within the wider plot of rights and obligations to their clients (Kasimbazi, 2004).

References

American Law Institute. (1936) Restatement of the Law of Property. St.Paul: AIP .

Bales, K (1999).  Disposable People.NY: University of California Press

Beitz, C. (2009). The idea of human rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Hohfeld, N.(1946) Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning.NY: Yale.

Hohfeld, W.(2000) Fundamental Legal Conceptions.  Westport: Greenwood Press .

Kasimbazi,E.(2004)Taxpayers’ Rights and Obligations.NY:Wiley

Kelsen,H  (1999) Pure Theory of Law.Oxford:OUP.

Motilal,S ( 2011)Applied Ethics and Human Rights.NY:Sage

Slater, T. (1911). Obligation. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton

Company. Retrieved March 7, 2013 from New Advent:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11189a.htm

Weimer,D ( 2009)Cost-Benefit Analysis and Public Policy .  Westport: Greenwood  .

 

Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.

[order_calculator]