मराठी

Principle: Mere Silence as to Facts Likely to Affect the Decision of a Person to Enter into a Contract is Not a Fraud. Facts: a Sells to B (A‘S Daughter Who is a Minor) a Horse

Advertisements
Advertisements

प्रश्न

Principle: Mere silence as to facts likely to affect the decision of a person to enter into a contract is not a fraud.

Facts: A sells to B (A‘s daughter who is a minor) a horse which A  knows to be unsound.  A says nothing to B about the unsoundness of the horse.

पर्याय

  • A has committed fraud 

  • A has committed no fraud 

  • There cannot be a contract between a father and daughter 

  • The daughter did not ask therefore the father did not tell, hence no fraud 

MCQ
Advertisements

उत्तर

A has committed no fraud 

Explanation:

A has not committed fraud because A is merely silent as to the facts likely to affect the decision of a person to enter into a contract. In this case, A is silent about the fact of unsoundness of his horse which he sells to his daughter. Hence no fraud has been committed.

shaalaa.com
Contract Law
  या प्रश्नात किंवा उत्तरात काही त्रुटी आहे का?
2018-2019 (May) Set 1

संबंधित प्रश्‍न

Principle: A condition must have complied in order to claim the benefit of an agreement.

Facts:  A agrees to transfer a farm to B, if B shall not go to England within three years after the date of the agreement, his interest in the farm shall cease. B does not go to England within the term prescribed.


An agreement is valid


Apply the legal principles to the facts given below and select the most appropriate answer.

Legal Principles:

1. Consideration is something that moves from the promisee to the promisor, at the implied or express request of the latter, in return for his promise. The item that moves can be a right, interest, profit, loss, responsibility given or suffered, forbearance, or a benefit which is of some value in the eyes of law.

2. An offer may be revoked at any time before the communication of its acceptance is complete as against the proposer, but not afterward.

Factual Situation: Bournville ran a sales promotion whereby if persons sent in 3 chocolate bar wrappers and a postal order for f 100 they would be sent a record. Big Beats owned the copyright in one of the records offered and disputed the right of Bournville to offer the records and sought an injunction to prevent the sale of the records which normally retailed at f 1,000. Under the Copyright Act, retailers are protected from breach of copyright if they gave notice to the copyright holders of the ordinary retail selling price and paid them 6.25% of this. Bournville gave notice stating the ordinary selling price was f 100 and three chocolate bar wrappers. The issue is whether the chocolate bar wrappers formed part of the consideration?


A death sentence by a lower court


The question consists of legal propositions/principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion. Such principles may or may not be true in the real sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true. In other words, in answering the following question, you must not rely on any principles except the principle that is given hereinbelow for the question. Further, you must not assume any facts other than those stated in the question. The objective of this section is to test your interest in the study of law, research aptitude, and problem-solving ability.

Principle: If a contract is made by post between two persons living in two different cities, then the contract is said to be completed as soon as the letter of acceptance is properly posted and the place of completion of the contract is that city where acceptance is posted. It is worth mentioning here that in every contract there is always an offer from one party and the acceptance of the offer from the other party.

Facts: Sani, a resident of Patna, give an offer by post to sell his house for 25 lack to Hani, a resident of Allahabad. This offer letter is posted on 1st January 2013 from Patna and reaches Allahabad on 7th January 2013. Hani accepts this offer and posts the letter of acceptance on 8th January 2013 from Allahabad which reaches Patna on 16th January 2013. But Sani presuming that Hani is not interested in accepting his offer sells his house to Gani at the same price on the 15th of January, 2013. Hani files a suit against Sani for the breach of contract in the competent court of Allahabad. Whether Hani will succeed?


LEGAL PRINCIPLES: 1. Acceptance must be given only by the person to whom the offer is made. 2. Communication of acceptance to a person who did not make the offer does not bind the offeror.
FACTUAL SITUATION: Pal sold his business to Sam without disclosing it to his customers. Mani, an old customer sent an order for goods to Pal by name. Sam, the new owner, executed the order. Mani refuses to accept the goods from Sam as he intended to deal only with Pal. In a suit by Sam against Mani: 
DECISION:


The following question consists of two statements, one labelled as. 'Assertion' and the other as 'Reason'. Read both the statements carefully and answer using the codes given below.

Assertion (A): No action lies for more damage caused by some act that does not violate a legal right.
Reason (R): An action lies for interference with another's legal right even where it causes no actual damage.


Given below is a statement of legal principle followed by a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts given below and select the most appropriate answer. 

Legal Principle: Every partner is liable alone and jointly with other partners for the debts of a partnership firm incurred for the business. Every partner is an agent of every other partner while being a principal in his own right in the business of the partnership. 
Fact Situation: Varun is a partner in a firm with Chinmoy and Jaffar. Jaffar purchases a car for his personal purpose and obtains credit for the same in the name of the partnership behind the back of the other partners. He fails to pay the due amount on the expiry of the period of credit.

Which of the following statements is the most appropriate in relation to the legal principle stated above?


Legal Principle: An agreement entered into by way of a wager/bet is unenforceable in law.

Fact Situation: Thomas is very good at predicting the outcomes of cricket matches. Raja and Hoja give him rupees thousand each to enable him to bet with others about the outcome of a cricket match. Thomas wins rupees three lakh after betting three thousand rupees.  

Which of the following statements is the most appropriate in relation to the legal principle stated above? 


Apply the legal principles to the facts given below and select the most appropriate answer.

Legal Principles:
1. A contract comes into being from the acceptance of an offer, When the person to whom the offer is made signifies his assent thereto, the proposal is said to be accepted and the parties are at consensus and idem regarding the terms of the agreement.
2. Consideration is something that moves from the promise to the promisor, at the implied or express request of the latter, in return for his promise. The item that moves can be a right. interest, profit, loss, responsibility given or suffered, forbearance, or a benefit which is of some value in the eyes of law.
3. Contractual rights and liabilities are exclusive to the parties to contract.
4. There are few exceptions to the doctrine of privity of contracts like agency, trust, assignment, and third party beneficiary.
5. A quasi-contract is a contract that is created by the court when no such official contract exists between the parties to prevent a party from being unjustly enriched, or from benefitting from the situation when he/she does not deserve to do so.

Facts: Goodtyre is a tyre manufacturer who agreed with their dealer to not sell the tyres below a recommended retail price (RRP). As part of the agreement, Goodtyre also required their dealers to gain the same agreement with their retailers, who in this instance was Bestmotors. The agreement held that if tyres were sold below the RRP, they would be required to pay 500 per tyre in damages to Good tyre. This was agreed between the dealer and Bestmotors, which effectively made Goodtyre a third party to that agreement. Sometime after this, Bestmotor sold the tyres below the agreed price and Goodtyre sued for damages and an injunction to prevent them from continuing this activity. Bestmotors is arguing that Goodtyre could not enforce the contract as it was not part of the contract between the dealer and Bestmotors. The court decided that Goodtyre had no right to access damages. Which of the following is the correct reasons?

I. The good tyre could not claim for damages as only a  party to a contract can claim damages under it.  

II. The good tyre had not given any consideration to  Bestmotors and therefore there could be no binding contract between the parties.  

III. The good tyre was not listed as an agent within the contract and could therefore not be included as a  valid third-party who had rights to claim on the contract. 


Share
Notifications

Englishहिंदीमराठी


      Forgot password?
Use app×