200909 Enterprise Law

Law

There are three questions in this assessment task. must answer all questions.

Question 1

Graham wishing to impress his friend Stacey, goes with Stacey to an antique shop. He inspects an antique dining table and asks the shop assistant the price. The shop assistant tells him that the price is $5,000. Graham says to the shop assistant that he will take it and gives his address to the shop assistant to deliver it to his home. Payment will be on delivery.

When the table arrives, Graham telephones the shop and tells the shop assistant that he was only pretending to buy the table and that he had no intention of going through with the purchase. The shop assistant tells him that Graham must pay for the table.

Is there a binding contract between Graham and the shop? Discuss this situation using case law to support any argument you may make.

Question 2

Andrew and Susan married in 2015 and lived together until they separated in 2018. After 12 months of living apart, they came to an agreement in relation to maintenance and property matters. The agreement was that Susan would pay Andrew $250,000 for his interest in their matrimonial home, and that Andrew would pay Susan $1000 per month to contribute to the mortgage payments on this home. Susan paid to Andrew $250,000 but Andrew refuses to make maintenance payments to Susan. Andrew argues that their agreement is not enforceable because it was made in a domestic context.

Is Andrew correct? Explain your answer and indicate relevant authority where appropriate.

Question 3

Chris owned and raced some greyhound dogs, who were very successful on the track. Bruce wanted to buy one of them and breed with it. However, when Bruce approached Chris, Chris told him his dogs were not for sale. Bruce increased the price he was offering but Chris continued to say no.

After several attempts Bruce finally said to Chris that he was being a stubborn ox and that dogs can easily die if one was not too careful with what they fed them.

Chris started to fear for the safety of his beloved animals and himself, so he approached another dog owner, George, and offered to sell all his dogs quite cheaply provided it was a quick sale. George agreed to the sale and now has the dogs.

Chris regrets his hasty decision and wishes to set aside the contract for the sale of his dogs. What legal argument could Chris make to set aside the contract for sale? Is it likely he will be successful?