Obligations Law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Obligations practice of law - Essay ExampleHowever CounterAct Ltd accused In-Tech Ltd of making off statements during negotiations. The In-Tech Ltd are liable to false statements as accused based on the selective information they presented during the negotiation process. For instance, in an email on February 15th, she aware CounterActs Head of IT that the DX-5 would be very cheap to run, costing no more than 25 pounds a week. The sales manager knew that the systems running costs are exceedingly high and did not emit the information. Instead, she advised the buyer that the system is cheap. But we find that the system is go through electricity at a rate of 50 pounds per day. This is too expensive considering the fact that In-Tech had given the tax of 25 in a week. This makes In-Tech liable to fraud and according to the elements of common law this is be capture In-Tech makes a clear-sighted misrepresentation of the material facts that it presents to the other party. In this ca se, Lily knew about the costs were high but did not disclose the information. It is a fact that the DX-5 is expensive this is against the promise made by In-Tech managers that the system would be cheap. Clause 13 of the contract provided for the proper installation of the system this means that the system needed to be installed in correct condition in the first week of July. The deadline for the installation was the 8th day of July. Unfortunately, by 14th July the software program setup was not installed and there were reports that the In-Tech Ltd had become notorious for late installations. The action is fraudulent because they had promised and even sign the contract on the same. The fact is that, they knew about the process of installation because this is their line of calling but they gave a short period of installation. This is considered by the law as promissory fraud. For instance, a case of this sort was litigated in Markow v ABC Transfer & Storage Co. In this case, a com mercial inhabit entered into negotiations to renew its mesh on a warehouse and railroad yard. The warehouse was crucial to the tenants continued business relationship with its main client, the Scott Paper Company, because Scott used the warehouse a regional product distribution facility. The parties were assured of renewal of tenants lease during the contract renewal negotiations but the landlord was secretly engaged in negotiations of selling the company to the Boeing Company at the same time. The sale went through and the landlord gave a notice to that tenant to vacate in twenty days. The tenant thus lost the Scott Paper contract and incurred extra unremarkable relocation expenses. The court found that the landlords promise regarding the lease renewal was fraudulent the promise was through with(p) to tie the tenant to the case as the sale did not materialize. The meaning of this is that false promises may cause great losses to the buyer and the seller through the court is forc ed to compensate the buyer. In other instance, In-Tech Ltd is liable to false statement when they claim that DX-5 is indestructible and the CounterAct staff argues that when once staff spilled a cup of coffee the system reacted badly to the heat and moisture and had to be repaired. The In-Tech may have unheeded the information hence misrepresentation of information is evident. All along there had been a misrepresentation of information and in most cases if the buyer realizes later that certain information was not