Contract Law

CONTRACT LAW PRACTICE EXAM QUESTION

When Tech Ltd entered the contract with Keith, it was established and agreed by both parties that the deadline for the system installation is on 20th December. The purpose of the deadline was purely because Keith have booked the conference hall on 22nd December for a third party and the projection system was essential for them to use.

Keith has payed £15,000 for the installation

On 15th December, Keith was informed by the Tech Ltd that due to lack of special electrician staff, they would not be able to finish the high-tech multimedia projection system until 5th January. Keith reluctantly agreed to pay extra £2,000 to allow the Tech ltd to hire more staff in order to meet the deadline and the only reason why he did that was because he had other events planned in the conference hall and the need of the equipment was vital.

Due to lack of organisation, the Tech was short on staff which is why they couldn’t finish their work on time, even though they agreed to finish it by 20th December. If Keith didn’t suggest to pay them extra £2,000 to finish the work on time, he would suffer economic loss because he wouldn’t be able to provide sufficient service for the delegates without the important projection system. There was a breach of contract from Tech Ltd side as they agreed to finish their installation by the deadline and they clearly didn’t manage that.

When looking at the Stilk v Myrick (1809) case, we have an example of performance of existing contractual duty owed to the same promisor. The crewmen was out in the sea when two members of the crew abandoned the ship while they were obligated to sail the ship back to the land. That is when the Capitan offered that he would distribute two wages of the men who had deserted among the remaining crew. On the arrival, the Capitan refused to pay the promised extra money. On his defence, the crew had done no more than was already required of them as part of their existing contractual...