Essay Title: 

business law project 2

March 24, 2016 | Author: | Posted in law, legal issues

Business Law

2006

Case 15-7

A written contract is presumed to be the final and complete agreement of the parties for as long as it is found to be an integrated writing (e .g not a mere draft . This being the case , the parol evidence rule will not allow any evidence to prove the contents of the contract other than the written document itself . It is the best evidence and the parties are not allowed to change the terms of the agreement or plead any extrinsic factors that serve to clarify [banner_entry_middle]

the contents thereof if there is no ambiguity in the first place . In simple terms , if what the parties have agreed upon is clear in the written document then the court will make its judgment based only upon such document and no other . The only reason for the court to look into extrinsic evidence is if there is fraud , misrepresentation or ambiguity . of these three are present in this case

The allegation of Canopy that the deduction of expenses is part of the contract deserves no weight . The contract clearly stated the amount of the fees to be paid . It was an absolute obligation , not made to rely on any condition . Hence , it is clear that Canopy Group , Inc . has to pay 600 ,000 to Novell and has breached the contract for giving an amount less than the one stipulated

Case 16-7

There was a contract entered into between the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA ) and the colleges and universities . This contract would stipulate , among other things , the rules of eligibility and participation for student-athletes . Although Jeremy Bloom was not a party to the contract (considering that the contract was entered into long before he was in college , he was one of its intended third-party beneficiaries because the contract regulated the eligibility of student-athletes and their disqualifications . As such third-party beneficiary , Jeremy may sue on the contract

Unfortunately , relief cannot be given to him in this case . The NCAA ‘s by-laws and rules are clear that student-athlete endorsements or media activities are prohibited . Jeremy ‘s argument that these media activities have no application because this is reserved for professional athletes but what Jeremy wanted was to continue these endorsements and . at the same time , play for his school . This is not allowed under the NCAA rules

Case 17-7

Frustration of purpose is a doctrine in contract law , which allows the parties to be discharged from their obligations when the principal purpose of the contract has been substantially frustrated without fault by a fortuitous event or occurrence and which makes the obligation impossible , illegal or grossly different from what was originally contemplated . This means that the present state or situation is not something that was foreseen by the contracting parties , otherwise they would not have entered into the contract

In this case , the storm damaged the very object of the contract : the signaling system . The agreement between the parties was to share the costs in maintaining that system… [banner_entry_footer]

Comments Off on business law project 2

Author:

This author has published 9190 articles so far. More info about the author is coming soon.

Comments are closed.