Business and employment law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Business and employment law - Essay Example Poppy simply seeks to buy the painting on display even though Bart refuses on the grounds that the product is solely for purposes of display. The fact that Bart is a retailer means that all freedoms to or not to sell any of the products to anyone is not in violation of a sales contract. In this case, Poppy cites offense when Bart does not seek to sell the painting1. To Poppy, the grounds for suing Bart include the fact that the painting on display is tallied as an offer. In the event of discriminatory sales, Poppy would use this as appoint to pin Bart and hence prove Bart’s liability. This is completely different form offering goods of poor quality and faulty. For Poppy, the contract consideration is lacking. Bart had not attached a price to the painting. The fact that the painting is on the shop’s wall does not in any way amount to an obligation for the trader to sell it leave alone accept her offer 2. The reason given for the trader’s decline does not include a nything of discrimination and consumer rights violation. Evidently, the necessary components for there to be a valid contract are absent which greatly discredits the grounds for suing Bart. Lovely Lighting Ltd’s Liability to Bart under the Law of Contract and Tort In the case alongside, Lovely Lighting Ltd is not indemnified from any damages and injuries resulting from the products they sell. With this, all aspects of a contract are fulfilled and are met. For this reason, a contractual liability would only arise due to a breach of contract. Tort liability is that which arises from a civil wrong3. In this case, the first step is to establish if there is a contract between parties. For this reason, one of the issues arising includes the likely disputes that may arise between Bart and Lovely Lighting Ltd. A salesperson approached Bart and presented him with an offer to purchase a sign bearing the name of Bart’s business. Bart accepted the offer through agreeing to purchas e the product, and signed a contract with the company with all the terms and conditions binding4. For an agreement to be considered a contract; there must be evidence of an offer (Lovely Lighting’s sign), acceptance (Bart’s signature on the sales contract), contractual intent (Bart’s motive to by the sign), legality of subject matter (the transaction is between legal bounds), and consideration (sign’s price)5. Bart was given an offer to purchase a sign bearing the name of his business, he accepted. There is the individually designed shop window lighting at the specified price which is the consideration. Lovely Lighting Ltd is a company doing legal business, and offered a legal business exchange. Both parties have the capacities to form contracts, and both parties showed intent to enter into the contract6. The case presented shows that Lovely Lighting Ltd does breach the contract and provided Bart with a product with a wrong name. This is a material breach since Lovely Lighting Ltd failed to use the right name of Bart’s business as agreed upon when signing the contract. Bart agreed to purchase a sign with the name ‘Artybarti’, which is his business’ name. The sign was designed with the name ‘Artyfarti’ which was not as per the contractual agreement. At this point, the obligation of the handling ot the sign rests with Lovely Lighting Ltd 7. Tort liability also comes into play a great deal. Lovely Lighting limited should be liable for selling defective products