Business Law for Australian Contract Act -myassignmenthelp.com

Question: Discuss about theBusiness Law for Australian Contract Act. Answer: The present case is based on the principle of oral contract. Under the Australian law, a contract is an agreement enforceable by law. A contract can be taken place either verbally or in written version. Both the terms have certain legitimacy. In an oral contract, there shall be certain essentials and if all the provisions are meet, that can be legally binding in nature. The essentials are offer and acceptance, terms of the contract, intention of the parties and the consideration (McKendrick 2014). In this case it has been observed that Mikaela wanted to buy Almond flour from Tower Flours. There was an oral contract made between them. An oral conversation was made in between Mikaela and the representative of the company about the gluten free substance of the cake. There was an agreement made subsequently but there was no mention regarding the gluten free condition. Mikaela prepared certain cake with the Almond Flours and delivered the same to a wedding ceremony. It was observed that some of the invitees were got sick after eating the cake and it was found the cakes were not gluten free. The problem of the case based on the fact whether there was any oral contract in between Mikaela and the Tower company or not. Under the Australian Contract Act, it has been mentioned that there are number of situation where the contract is made of oral version. In case of purchase order, verbal agreements are common. In this case, there is an order regarding the purchase of almond flour has been made and the statement of such contract is attracting the provision of the Australian Contract Act. In that contract, there was a consideration of 40 kilogram of Almond flour has been made. Therefore, it can be stated that an oral contract has been made in between both the parties (Andrews 2015) Regarding the second issue, it can be stated that law of implied term is a part of the Australian Contract Act. According to (O'Sullivan and Hilliard 2016) implied terms are such terms that are not expressly provided under the agreement. There are two types of law that are dealing with the implied terms of contract such as the common law and the statute. Under the common law, intention of the parties is important. In Codelfa construction vs State Rail Authority (1982) 149 CLR 337 it was held that the implied terms should provide certain business efficacy to the contract. However, certain problem arises when the parties have failed to address their mind regarding the matter of the contract. In Shirlaw v Southern Foundries (1926) 2 KB 206, it was held that there is no necessity regarding the implied terms if the terms are expressly provided in the agreement. It should be noted that the conditions of the implied and the express terms should not be contradictory in nature (Vettori 2016). In the present case, it has been observed that in the wedding ceremony of Dan and Jacob, Mikaela had provided cake that is made up of Almond flour. However, the cake was not gluten free and many invitees were fall in ill. In the case, there is no mention that the parties have ever impliedly or expressly states the cake should be of gluten free (Pearson 2017). They had asked for almond flour and the same was delivered by Mikaela. Therefore, it cannot be stated that there was any implied terms present in between the bride and Mikaela. In the present cases, it has been observed that two terms are used to describe the position of the subject matter. The first term is condition to the contract and the second one is warranty of the contract. There is a narrow distinction between the warranty and condition of the contract. Warranties are based on certain state of affairs regarding a contract and the nature of the same is implied. Under the Australian law, warranties are used as against less serious facts where the condition of contract is applying on serious facts. The term less important facts denote such contractual terms by which the parties suffer less. In Tramways Advertising Pty Ltd v Luna Park (1938) (SR) 632, it was held by the court that a warranty of a contract depends upon the effectiveness. If the breach affects whole parts of the contract, it will be treated as condition of contract and if the breach affects some portion of the contract, it will be treated as warranties of contract (Poole 2016). In the present case, it was observed that Kimiko was placed an order regarding the cake that should be furnished with blue and purple coloured icing. However, at the time of delivery he saw that the cake was decorated with blue and green icing. A breach is occurring in this case, but it is less serious in nature. Therefore, it can be stated that there is a warranty of contract has been taken place. The last part of the case is dealing with the responsibilities of Mikaela regarding the icing problem of the cake. In the case, it has been observed that while Kimiko was placing his order, he saw a poster where there is a provision regarding the responsibility of the breach of any warranty has been mentioned (Van Den Hurk and Verhoest 2016). It was also mentioned that the shop will not held responsible for any warranty of contract. He saw the post and had not made any questions regarding the same. This thing can be stated as silent acceptance by Kimiko. When there is a breach happened regarding the cake, he is barred under law not to take any steps against Mikaela. Under the Australian Contract Act, there is a provision regarding the acceptance. A party accepts something when he has knowledge about the outcome of the matter. After the acceptance, the consenting party is under an obligation not to take any step against any party regarding the same offer. Therefore, in the present case, Mikaela is not responsible for icing of wrong colour (Freedland et al. 2016). Reference: Andrews, N., 2015.Contract law. Cambridge University Press. Freedland, M., Bogg, A., Cabrelli, D., Collins, H., Countouris, N., Davies, A.C.L., Deakin, S. and Prassl, J. eds., 2016.The contract of employment. Oxford University Press. McKendrick, E., 2014.Contract law: text, cases, and materials. Oxford University Press (UK). O'Sullivan, J. and Hilliard, J., 2016.The law of contract. Oxford University Press. Pearson, G., 2017. Further challenges for Australian consumer law. InConsumer Law and Socioeconomic Development(pp. 287-305). Springer, Cham. Poole, J., 2016.Textbook on contract law. Oxford University Press. Van Den Hurk, M. and Verhoest, K., 2016. The challenge of using standard contracts in publicprivate partnerships.Public Management Review,18(2), pp.278-299. Vettori, S., 2016.The employment contract and the changed world of work. CRC Press.