Question 1
Question 1
In its simplest definition, a pact is simply an agreement between two parties who have permission to make that agreement. One of the participants in a contract makes a proposition to the other party to see whether the offer is agreeable or not (Schedl et al.2018). Ms. Cantik is new in the music business and has made a contract without reviewing the terms and conditions of the contract. The objective of this writing is to help her decide whether to sue Mr.Bijak or not.
All pacts start as a result of a certain need to be fulfilled. Somebody wishes for a favor, if the other party can fulfill (assume accountability for) that goal. This first significant characteristic, known as “the proposition,” entails each participant’s role roles, and duties while also showing a mutual benefit (Schedl et al.2018). That benefit might be financial or related to an intended behavior or outcome. In this case, Ms. Cantik;s contract has an element of offer where her goal is to benefit from getting a manager to endorse her music career, hence the contract adheres to the first element of a contract according to the Malaysian constitution Act 137 chapter 2 regarding the legality of contracts’
Moreover, according to the constitution, A contract is not there legally exist until everything is acknowledged by the offered participants. Until adoption, the proposition can be reclused or nullified at any time once it has been acknowledged. The offered party is in the capacity to make a counterargument. The proposed offer is nullified once a refute is submitted, while the participants are in the midst of coming up with a new expected goal. In this case, Ms. Cantik did sign the contract with her signature meaning she agreed and acknowledged the contract and did not make a counteroffer before signing the contract
According to the law a mitigate, in practice, is seen as a nullification of the pre-existing agreement. The international Corporate Governance guidelines for instance acknowledge the legality of changing standards to proposition if they are stated to both participants and do not create inconvenience (Schedl et al.2018). For this statute, Ms. Cantik is able to refute the contract as it creates inconveniences on her side as she had not fully grasped the contents of the terms and conditions of the contract she was about to sign therefore entitled to a recluse from the contract if it were the case of the Universal Corporate Governance which is not because she had signed a private contract with her manager and the music label.
When a deal is placed in writing, it is deemed accepted in most jurisdictions. Even if the proposer never receives the agreement, the “the written rule” applies. The key requirement for an acceptance’s legality is that there must be a clear and consistent declaration that all of the agreement’s conditions and duties are accepted by signing. In this case, the written rule applies to Ms. Cantik as she had sighned all the terms and conditions of the offer despite the fact that she had not read most of them, the fact remains that the terms and conditions of the contract are clear precise and unambiguous to the reader, therefore, Mr.Bijak has a right to sue Ms. Catkin of breach of contract as stated in the Malaysian law ACT 137 chapter 2
The Elements of a Contract
For legitimate enforceability, both participants should be conscious that they are entering into a compact. Both contracting participants must give permission, which is sometimes referred to as “a confluence of the thoughts.” They must adhere to the existence of the relationship and consensually abide by its guidelines. In fact, if acknowledgment is not there, partnerships may be canceled. The contract will be nullified if one of the participants reached a deal under coercion or can establish disproportionate influence, or deception. As a consequence, it is essential for all partners to sign a pact to show that the agreement is realistic and reciprocal and that all parties to its terms are very unambiguous.
Conclusion
According to the laws of the contract stated in the Malaysian construction on awareness of contract signing Mrs. Catkin can sue Mr.Bijak and his music label because Ms.Catkin was acting under duress from Mr. Bijak because he had given her an ultimatum if she does not sign the deal it would be given to another deserving candidate, therefore, putting pressure on Ms. Catkin to sign the contract without reading the terms and conditions of the contract. This clearly goes against the constitution and Ms. Catlin should be compensated for her wasted time and discomfort brought by the one-sided contract.
Question 2
Adverse conflicts can be settled by the judicial process via an integrated effort, some disputing parties will not be able to achieve an agreement. In some instances, the governments’ imposition is required to bring the case to a resolution. Perhaps more focused on offering justice through competency, especially if the conflict includes perceived rights under the law, legislative misbehavior, or the fear of court action and appeal against them. The aim of writing this question is to see how the Malaysian court system settles disputes brought to them and lastly is to look at Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
Court action is the popular prevalent type of court conflict settlement. Whenever one side files a complaint against the other, the court starts. The constitutional validity lawsuit in the Malaysian government The procedures are quite official and are controlled by regulations created by the parliament, such as legal principles and processes. It involved an impartial judge sitting in a jury with the best interest at heart for the conflicting parties and the cases are heard and the decision is made in accordance with the evidence presented.
Due to the adversarial nature of the court, partners typically choose to settle their differences informally. Arbitral tribunals and negotiators are frequently retired magistrates or private attorneys; nevertheless, educated and competent non-legal conflict resolution professionals are developing in the domain of nontraditional dispute settlement. Also known as ADR
The employment of tools such as conciliation and negotiation to resolve a disagreement rather than going to court is known as Alternative Dispute settlement. This involves individuals coming together in an informal settlement without involving the court action because they are usually hostile to both parties and may not result in a favorable outcome as it would strain the relationship of both parties.
Contract Validity and Legality
Mediation
This method of conflict resolution is also known as facilitating, it provides the participant’s control over the resolution. A very impartial facilitator heres both parties and tries to establish a connection where both parties can come to a common ground and resolve their issues amicably and peacefully without involving the court system whatsoever in any case. This method is usually a piece of advice if parties wish to maintain their close relationships with each other as going to court would only make matters worse for both of them other than the public humiliation the parties are going to face. It can take place by:
Meeting in person — participants engage directly even during the case.
Glider — the intermediary separates the parties while trying to stabilize a common ground.
Mitigative — the intermediary directs peaceful resolution among conflicting parties
Assistive — at different meetings, the facilitator oversees the legality of claims of the sides’ and may facilitate grounds of compromise.
If the antagonizing parties are of close conduct, this method is highly applicable for it will not only maintain their privacy but also retain their relations to a fundamental level and ensure no bonds are broken in the process of settling the dispute.
Arbitration
Arbitration is by far the most technical of all alternatives to conflict resolution. It spares parties from making the uninformed decision by use of an adjudicator to intercede on the behalf of both parties. The arbitrator is usually impartial to the case to avoid any biasness on one side. In Malaysia arbitration is treated as a court hearing, only that is very informal and parties are not liable to a lawsuit action that may result from harsh judgment based on the rule of law.
In contrast to other methods of conflict resolution, it is based on reasoning. In Malaysia, adjudication might be “compliant” or “non-compliant” compliant arbitration implies the sides agree to forego their right to a fair trial, accept the arbitrator’s judgment as definitive, and there is typically no legal recourse. If an agreement bears a compliant arbitration provides, the conflict should be settled by adjudication rather than a trial. If the participants do not accept the arbitrator’s judgment, non-compliant adjudication allows them to pursue a trial. If the court ruling is less advantageous than the arbitral resolution, some legislative action will levy fees or penalties.
Conclusion
Arbitration is useful in circumstances where a court hearing is more likely to levy charges and this is seen as the only way to resolve a pending conflict without the use of the rule of law. It’s also suitable when the parties desire a responsible party who knows about the issue at hand ( Basu,2019). Lastly, the best ADR method recommended is mediation because it very simple when both parties agree and agree on a workable compromise to ensure a win-win situation other than using arbitration where any party can refute the resolution when they feel it is not beneficial to them. It goes without saying that there is another way of resolving conflict using Alternative Dispute Reconciliation but mediation is usually preferred for its long-run benefits.
Breach of Contract and Legal Consequences
Question 1
Peter and Liam are involved in a business transaction but everything goes south as Liam wants to return the car Peter had sold him claiming that the braking system is defective. These two parties are antagonizing each other as Liam is involved in a car accident with the vehicle Peter sold him. The reason for writing this is to advise Peter on his rights to selling and purchasing goods under the Malaysian constitution under the Act.
Under the Act “Buyer” denotes a purchaser or agrees to acquire goods; “ownership” means the consensual transfer of ownership from one individual to another; commodities all seem to be in a “usable form” when they really are in a condition that the purchaser would be required to accept shipment of them within the transaction. According to the situation (Basu,2019). Liam had inspected the car for any faults before purchasing the car and had prior knowledge the car was in a good condition therefore Peter should not be liable for the accident Lim had in conjunction with the faulty braking system and therefore is not required to pay any cent to Lim whatsoever.
“Vendor” means an individual who wants to sell or appears to agree to sell items; “specialized goods” result in a positive price agreed on this by the person to whom the offer of purchases is made; and any affirmation utilized but not categorized in this Act that is described in the Contract Act has the definition given to it in the same law (Basu,2019. According to this act, Peter being the seller is not to be refuted by the seller as they had agreed on the price of the vehicle and Liam is in no condition to demand cashback or any form of compensation from Peter because their deal was completed before the unprecedented incident occurred to change the current value of the commodity.
According to chapter 2 of The Formation Of Contract, a selling contract might be unconditional or restricted A hire purchase agreement is termed a sale when the ownership of the products is passed from the purchaser, but an offer for sale when the ownership of the goods is conveyed at a later time or pursuant to a precondition that must be met later( Basu,2019) Whenever the time limit for transferring the ownership of the goods expires or the criteria for transferring the ownership are met, the agreement to sell will become a purchase. This directly implies that Peter had made a sale that is unconditional as the time of purchase had expired before Liam made a claim of compensation so therefore Peter is not liable to compensate Lim for any inconveniences thereafter.
Conclusion
Clearly as seen in the Malaysian constitution under the Sale of Goods Act, I would advise Peter that he has no cause to compensate Lim for the car accident and therefore not return the money made in the purchase because this was a situation of willing buyer, willing seller and whatever happens next is not on him rather is the on the seller for careless handling.
Question 2
Question 2
A housing project was completed by Sunshine Developers Sdn and has caused serious issues to the purchaser as the water tank was seriously damaged and has caused unforeseeable damage to the property. This writeup is intended to advise the purchasers on their rights to claim funds from the housing project of Sunshine Developers Sdn.
According to the National Land Code of 1965, when only a portion of a piece of land is infringed, compensation paid for “the destruction, if any, continual or likely to be incurred by the participant at the time of the property should be considered (Talwar,2020). This according to the constitution in simple terms means that the afflicted party should be compensated. The purchasers of the housing project, therefore, have a right to the compensation for under the constitution, Sunshine developers Sdn is to compensate the afflicted party according to the land value based currently on the value of damage at the market price
According to the constitution, compensations are benefits given to a claimant to ease inconveniences such as damages, or other inconveniences. In legitimate litigation circumstances where an inconvenience has happened as a consequence of some other participants’ shortcomings or illegal activities, compensatory inconveniences are given (Talwar,2020).In this case, the claimants are the purchasers who out to be compensated by the careless party which is the Sunshine developers Sdn for it is their property that cause the accident leading to damage to property.
According to National Land Code 1965 act in Malaysia, the claimant is mandated to prove that an inconvenience has occurred as a consequence of adversary action so as to demand monetary gains. In presence of a litigation panel, the claimant is supposed to calculate the extent of damage (Basu, 2019). In other terms, it alludes to: if the purchasers can prove beyond reasonable doubt that Sunshine developers Sdn had anything to do with the damages they will have no other alternative than to pay for the loss incurred to the purchaser’s end ( Basu,2019). Lastly, my advice to the purchasers is that they should sue Sunshine developers Sdn so that they can be properly compensated according to the constitution other than wait for compensation without litigation action, for this may not happen or may take a very long time to get compensated it is mandatory for compensation in this case and will prove productive in the long run.
Ali bought a new car Toyoyo Welwater under a hire-purchase agreement with Bank Kaya Berhad. The agreement provided 108 monthly installments (Standau et al.2021). However, after one year, Ali defaulted on his monthly installments for three consecutive months. As a result, Bank Kaya Berhad wants to repossess the car. The aim of this write-up is to discuss the position the passion of the bank in regards to the Hire purchase price Act of 1967.
The Hire-Purchase Act 1967, accepted for publication as Laws of Malaysia Act 212, regulates and controls, among many other items, the forms, and components of the purchasing arrangements, the legitimacy and obligations of the participants to such contractual arrangements, and the definition and description of the obligations of persons impacted by any money transfers, including sureties and intermediaries (Standau et al.2021). The changes made to this Act have facilitated financial activity in Malaysia, mostly by adding a layer of “customer commodity” to include a wide range of items and automobiles. Under the act parties involved have a moral obligation to keep the end of their deal as manded by the terms of the hire purchase agreement by both parties: the buyer and the seller.
The bank, under this act, has a right to repossess the care sold to Ali because Ali did not keep his end of the bargain as stipulated in the Hire Purchase Act of 1967. Ali had paid his installments partially therefore is refuted to either pay the full amount owed or the bank will have no choice but to repossess the car sold.
According to the act for unprotected products, hire buy arrangements to give more security to the supplier than that of other sales or rental methods since possession is not surrendered until the conclusion of the contract (Standau et al.2021). This is because the things are more readily seized if the buyer defaults on his or her installments. In this scenario, the buyer, Ali has defaulted payment for an extended period of time and therefore the seller Bank Kaya Berhad retains the right to own the vehicle with or without the consent of Ali. On the other hand, if Ali wishes to retain his claim on the vehicle will have no choice but to renegotiate with the bank so that he can be given a grace period of time for him to pay his remaining balance rather than have his money go to waste because during this cases there usually no refunds because the blame is usually on the buyer.
The end hires purchase mode of payment in most cases is usually more expensive than making absolute payments on payment of an item. This is due to the fact that they might have substantially higher interest payments. Ali is a good example of this situation, my advice to Ali is either to let the vehicle be repossessed by the bank or make full payment to retain the vehicle on a permanent basis.
References
Basu, S. (2019). Are price-cost markups rising in the United States? A discussion of the evidence. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 33(3), 3-22.
Begawan, B. S., Darussalam, N. B., Sintok, U. U. M., Aman, K. D., & Masum, A. Consumer Protection for Sale of Goods under the Malaysian Sale of Goods Act 1957 and the Consumer Protection Act 1999: With Special Reference to Quality and Fitness of Goods.
Rahman, N. R. A. (2018). The rise and fall of caveat emptor in Malaysian sale of goods contract. Journal of Law and Governance, 1(1), 1-14.
Schmiedl, S., Rottenkolber, M., Szymanski, J., Drewelow, B., Siegmund, W., Hippius, M., … & German Net of Regional Pharmacovigilance Centers (NRPC). (2018). Preventable ADRs leading to hospitalization—results of a long-term perspective safety study with 6,427 ADR cases focusing on elderly patients. Expert opinion on drug safety, 17(2), 125-137.
Standau, T., Nofar, M., Dörr, D., Ruckdäschel, H., & Altstädt, V. (2021). A Review on Multifunctional Epoxy-Based Joncryl® ADR Chain Extended Thermoplastics. Polymer Reviews, 1-55.
Talwar, S., Dhir, A., Kaur, P., & Mäntymäki, M. (2020). Why do people purchase from online travel agencies (OTAs)? A consumption values perspective. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 88, 102534.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
