Legal Aspects of Project Management

legitimate Aspects of Project Management1. Introduction to the scram fair playLaw of fetch The law of funk is the study of intelligent principles which underlie all(prenominal) switch offs it is non concerned with divisionicular types of shortens and their specialized rules (Koffman and Mac wear downald 2001).What squelch laws do?This can be briefly explained as follows Agreement is make in the midst of two parties, when some disputes between the parties arise over the agreement, past one or both parties initiates the judicial process. Then the judicial applies the rules of the contract law like premier(prenominal) they escort with the formation and vitiation of the project and adds on the identification and interpretation of the express basis in the contract and check for the terms included in the contract, from that all they subtract the in reasonable expressions and terms and finally they look for the remedies of breach and gives the result. Though the contract l aw basically stands on the basics of the agreement of the parties, the result is completely based on the process of judicial application of the contract law.Purpose of contract law Butterworths states that contract law has m each(prenominal) purposes, but the central one is to backup man and to control the million of agreements that collectively make up the market frugality. (Turner C 2006)Based on the knowledge of law of contract, Legal advice volition be devoted to the two subject fields in the assignment. Firstly, Nancy and Andy geek, Andy is advised whether Andy is eligible to collect the reward 3000 announced by Nancy for safe return of her quest after, which Nancy has refused to give to Andy blush after safe return of her get over saying she grow neer made that twist to him as a mortal. Then in Fine fuddles Ltd oddball, where the telephoner could non fulfill all the customers, supplying there dedicates, as they dont hold sufficient stock and Adam is advised whether the queer customers might train a valid claim against their company.2. Nancy v Andy consequence2.1. Brief introduction of the case.Nancy owns a pet frank called Rombo one twenty-four hour period she find it missing, then she placed an advertisement in the journal stating wanting DOG, OFFER OF REWARD and she also stated that I am pass 3000 for its safe return. Looking at the advertisement one psyche named Andy remembered that he saw the correspondent dog roaming in the nearby commons and the next day he caught the dog and returned the dog to Nancy and remembered her about the quip she mentioned in the advertisement, in reply to that she said stop being so silly, Andy I pick up never made the stateing to you as an individual and said him to leave the house. Andy has to be advised whether he is entitled to 3000 reward.2.2. Legal bribes arising in the caseThe main profound subject in the case is, whether Nancy is subjected to contract with Andy to pay him 3000 .In order to solve the to a higher place profound issue we have to checkout the main elements of the contract in the case. allow the elements we atomic number 18 mainly going consider be gap, acceptance and spirit to be soundly bound.2.3. Legal research related to the case.Contract A contract is an agreement between two parties by which both ar bounded in law and which can therefore be enforced in a court or other equivalent fabrication ( Turner C 2006), The person who places the rear is know as qualifyinger and the person who accept the offer is an offeree. We have two different trems to be known, they are offer and acceptance(accept). This are the two main elements in a contract.One way of classifying contracts is accord to whether they are bilateral or nonreversible.Bilateral contract In bilateral contract a ascertain by one companionship is exchanged for the declare of the other ships company (Duxbury R 1997). Where the both parties are bind to the contract.U nilateral contract In unilateral contract one party betoken to do something in return for the act of the other party, the act is defined by the party makes the promise (Duxbury R 1997).From the above definition we know that the case we are dealing (Nancy Andy) may comes under unilateral contract. Nancy is the party who sets the contract, by makes the promise of offering 3000 for the safe return of the dog. Here safe return of the dog is the act set by Nancy. declare oneself An offer is a legal commitment, a proposal which invites, indeed presupposes, eventual acceptance. (David Oughton Martin Davis 1997). The person who sets the offer is known as offerer and the person who accepts to the offer is known as offeree. Offer may be addressed to one particular person, a group of people or the cosmos at large, as in an offer of a reward (Duxbury R1997).In this case the advertisement made by Nancy can be considered as an offer and Nancy as an offeror and Nady is the offeree, the offer is an offer of reward which is addressed to the world at large. bridal Acceptance may be defined as an unconditional assent, communicated by the offeree to the offeror, to all terms of the offer, made with the intention of accepting (Duxbury R 1997).Acceptance in unilateral contract Acceptance of a unilateral offer pick up not be communicated, because performance is the same as acceptance (Carlill v Carbolic kitty globe Co.(1893) 1 Q.B 256 Turner C 2006).Intention to be legally bounded The court have recognized that some agreements, by there nature, are not intend to be legally bond (Duxbury R 1997). The agreement does not become a binding contract unless the parties have shown, expressly or by implication, that they intended to create legal relations Rose and Frank v. Crompton Bros Ltd.1923. (W T Major 1993).Lindley LJ relating to the case Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co.1893 1 Q.B 256 says that we have to first consider whether the advertisement was intended to be a promise at all, or whether it was a unpolluted puff which meant nothing. His answer for the question was it a classical puff? was No, he has made his answer upon the passage in the advertisement deoxycytidine monophosphate0 is deposited with the bond Bank, shewing our sincerity in the matter where this statement clearly their promise (Burrows A 2007).The same question arises that whether really Nancy has given that advertisement to create a legal relation. The statement in the advertisement does not really promise that Nancy will be surely paying the reward to the person who brings her dog safe to her. In advertisements the court will look for the intention of the offeror in making the advertisement. As in the case of Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co.1893 1 Q.B 256. Therefore in this case, the reward Nancy has mentioned in her advertisement is mere puff and is not intended to form the basis of a binging contract (Duxburg R 1997).2.4 Summary of the legal research.All the basic elements of the contract have not fulfilled to bind a contract. The offer made is not bind to the intention to be legally bounded and its mere puff. So a binding contract is not formed.2.5 Legal advice to AndyThe advertisement given by Nancy in the newspaper is an offer of reward which is opened to the world which is a unilateral offer and the sentences of the offer are so wraithlike as they do not mention about for how long is the offer is and there is no promise made regarding the reward.In the case of unilateral offer the acceptance is considered when the person starts the work as mentioned in the offer and there is no need to be any communication between the offeror and the offeree (in this case Nancy and Andy respectively).Thus acceptance has occurred when Andy started to search the missing dog of Nancy. Then when it comes to the reward in the advertisement Nancy had not made any promise that she will be giving the reward amount of 3000in the advertisement.So Nancy really does not inte nd to be legally bonded. Though Andy performed according to the offer it has got no value. Thus a full binding contract is not formed between Nancy and Andy so Andy does not have any valid dollar bill against Nancy to clam for the reward.3. Finewines Ltd Case3.1. Brief introduction of the caseFinewines Ltd is an importer and allocator of fine wines, based in Sunderland, as a part of there sales strategy had distributed their monthly memorial containing a joust of wines and there prices to there customers. One among the enumerate was White Australian wine for 75 per case.Looking at their catalogue ten of their customers had ordered for 100 cases of White Australian wine each, then Finewines Ltd realised that they do not hold that amount of stock to fulfil all the customers, all they have is only(prenominal) 500 cases of that White Australian wine as they did not excepted that sort of response that month and it had never occurred earlier and the general tutor Adam want to know w hether the disappointed customers hold any valid clam against them.3.2. Legal issues rising in the caseThe main issue is the whether the customers of Finewines Ltd have a valid claim against them.To solve the above issue we have to find whether the catalogues sent to the customers by Finewines Ltd is on offer or invitation to pact.3.3 legal research related to the case.Distinguish between offer and Invitation to agreement An offer is an statement or expression of willingness to contract for certain terms, where it requires only an acceptance to form a binding agreement and it must be distinguished from all other statements which are made in the job of negotiation in forming a contract only a offer has a capability to transfer in to an contract.The most common statements that have to be distinguished from offer are an invitation to accordance. The technical definition for invitation to agreement is the statements indicating the makers willingness to receive offer (T A Dwones 199 7).In this case the Finewines Ltd. company have sent their customers a catalogue which contains a list of wines and there price. The is no statement which is as define in the above sentence for an offer, so there is no statement of offer which could imeditally qualify in to an contract, therefore it can be merely an invitation to accordance.Finewines Ltd sent the catalogue as their sales strategy to customers to receive offer from the customers. This is supported by Grainger Sons v Gough 1896 AC 325. In the context of the distributed prise list which is similar to the distribution of the catalogues by Finewines Ltd, Lord Herschell said that the point was made that the provider will not want to become bound to sale more than of a particular item he can supply, which could occur in the prise list (or advertisement) was considered as an offer (Rowland D Macdonald E 2005).Second, relating to the order placed by the customers of Finewines Ltd, in a similar case of invitation to trea ty which is the case of Pharmaceutical alliance of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) Ltd 1953 1 QB 401, where the goods displayed is considered as invitation to treaty and Lord Goddard CJs decision states that the display was not an offer, where it was the customer who was making an offer to buy (Burrows A 2007). Similarly in this case the catalogue is not an offer and the order from the customer is the offer now its to the Finewines Ltd to accept the offer from the customers.3.4 Summary of the legal researchThe catalogue containing the price list of the wines does not form an offer, its an invitation to treaty and the orders from the customers based on that catalogue are the offers.3.5 Legal advice to AdamFinewines Ltd, an importers and distributor of fine wines has distributed their monthly catalogue containing the list of wines and their prices to their customers as their sales strategy, which is an invitation to treaty from the Finewines Ltd and the orders from the customers are the offers and its the Finewines Ltd to accept the offer that they can do as per the company norms if they have such as first come first serve, last come first serve etc., thus an contract is not formed in between the customers and the company till now so the disappointed customers do not hold any valid clam against Finewines Ltd.ReferencesKoffman and Macdonald (2001). The Law Of Contract. 4th ed. Surrey Tolley.Mindy Chen-Wishart (2005). Contract Law. Oxford Oxford.Chris Turner (2006). Unlocking Contract Law second ed. capital of the United Kingdom Hodder Educations.Robert Duxbury (1997). Contract In Nutshells 4th ed. capital of the United Kingdom Sweet and Maxwell.David Oughton and Martin Davis (2000). lineage Book on Contract Law 2nd ed. London Cavendish publishing Ltd.T A Dwones (1997). Text book on contract. 5th ed. London Black Stone Press Ltd.Chris Turner (2006). Contract Law 2nd. London Hodder Educations.Andrew Burrows (2007). A case book on contract. Oxford Hart Publications.Diane Rowland, Elizabeth Macdonald (2005). Information technology Law. (http//books.google.co.uk/books? id=-VtTiR8niBECpg=RA10-PA273lpg=RA10-A273dq=grainger +%26+ sons+v+gough+1896+ac+325source=webots=6zk75i6NHksig=JfG3JbLF9eWRFibj-iDWS8fgE4Yhl=en)Table of casesCarlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co.1893 1 Q.B 256Rose and Frank v. Crompton Bros.1923Grainger Sons v Gough 1896 AC 325 7Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) Ltd 1953 1 QB 401, 7