The city of Calgary Advertised for Tenders for a Construction Project: Business Law Assignment. UoC, Canada
|University||University of Calgary (UoC) Canada|
TORTS & CONTRACTS Assignment
INSTRUCTIONS: Carefully consider the arguments for each side and the likely outcome. Explain in proper essay style what the major issues are in each case, what legal contract principles would be argued for each side, and what a judge would probably ultimately decide.
- The city of Calgary advertised for tenders for a construction project. One of the terms of the advertisement was that once submitted the bid could not be revoked. Northern Construction submitted the low bid on the job. They then examined their bid and realized they had made an error in their calculations. They showed these documents to Calgary’s representatives who agreed that they had made an error. Northern Construction then requested that they be released from their bid. Calgary, however, would not release them from the bid and then accepted it as the winning one. Northern Construction refused to honor the contract and Calgary was forced to go with the second-lowest bid. They then sued. Explain the legal arguments available to both sides and the likely outcome of the action.
- The infant plaintiff purchased a second-hand automobile from the defendant for $300 which, after being driven for 119 kilometers, broke down. Because the transmission needed replacing, which would have cost $200; the plaintiff simply towed the car to the home of the defendant, returned the keys, and repudiated the contract. The infant then brought an action to recover the purchase price. Explain the probable outcome. Would your answer be any different if the car had not broken down, but the plaintiff had simply decided against buying the car?
- The younger Mr. Gill was fluent in English and a sophisticated businessman who had worked in a credit union for a number of years as well as managing his father’s berry farm. To take advantage of a business opportunity, he arranged with the Royal Bank to borrow $87,000. During the negotiations, it became clear that he could get a more favorable rate of interest if his father guaranteed the loan. In fact, the son had done a considerable amount of banking on behalf of his father who was also a customer of the same bank. The elder Mr. Gill could not read, write or speak English and relied on his son in all his business dealings. The documents were prepared, and the son brought his father to the bank to sign. At no time did he explain to his father that he was signing a personal guaranty and the evidence is clear that the father had no idea what he was signing other than it was a document associated with a loan transaction. Mr. Gill exercised implicit faith in his son’s handling of his business affairs. Mr. Gill, junior, on the other hand, was so excited about the deal that he apparently never explained the nature of the document to his father. It is clear in this situation that at no time was there any misrepresentation to the father or the son on the part of the bank. When the loan defaulted, the bank turned to the father for payment. Explain the arguments of the father and the bank as to whether Mr. Gill, senior, should be held responsible for this debt and the likely outcome.
- Banner, the defendant in this action, was in the brokerage business and was developing a computer software network to handle his business. The plaintiff, Computer Workshop Ltd., entered into an agreement with Banner to provide him with the necessary hardware and software equipment to do the job. After 25 of the 100 computers were delivered, Banner discovered that Computer Workshops was negotiating with Banner’s competition to provide them with a similar system with similar capabilities. Banner learned that in those discussions certain confidential information that he had given to Computer Workshops had been disclosed to their competitor. Banner refused to take the rest of the computers. Computer Workshops sued for breach. Explain arguments on both sides and any defense that might be available to Banner in these circumstances.
- A seven-year-old boy followed his dog into Mr. Howe’s backyard. The boy fell into a large hole dug by Mr. Howe in preparation for a tree that had been ordered. The boy broke his arm in the fall. At the hospital, a doctor employed there for four years treated the boy. The doctor did not set the boy’s arm because he failed to see on the x-ray and indication that the arm was broken. The arm healed improperly. When the boy kept complaining, his parents took him to the family doctor that discovered the break. The boy had his arm re-broken so that it could be set properly. On these facts, discuss the following:
- a) Was the boy a trespasser? If so, does this mean that the owner of the land did not owe the boy a duty of care?
- b) Do we look to case law developed over hundreds of years to discover the applicable principles, or is there subsequent legislation?
- c) Did the doctor owe a duty of care to the boy? If so, what is the standard of care owed? Is it the same as that of a family doctor?
- d) Is the hospital solely liable for any harm suffered to the boy by the treatment by the doctor?
- e) Could the court hold the boy partially responsible for his injuries? If they did, what would be the consequence with respect to the finding of fault or award of damages?
- f) What if the boy suffered from a rare bone disease and there was little likelihood that the break would heal properly, if at all, with the result that the boy lost the use of his arm?
- Beth and Alan had just left an expensive jewelry store in the Eaton’s Center when they were stopped by the store detective who told them he was going to detain them until a police officer came to charge them with theft of a pair of emerald and diamond earrings. Beth was upset; felt compelled to wait and did wait. Alan, however, just walked away and left the shopping center. It turned out that the jewelry was still in the glass case in the store and not on Beth or Alan. On these facts, explain whether the following statements are true.
- a) The detective had a reasonable belief that a theft had been committed and therefore cannot be sued.
- b) The detective wanted to hold them both and therefore, both Beth and Alan can sue him for nuisance.
- c) There was no crime committed and therefore, both Beth and Alan can sue him for false imprisonment.
- Beth could successfully sue both the store detective and the jewelry store-owner.
- Steven Daedalus, a novelist, and poet was admitted to a psychiatric hospital and diagnosed as having a manic-depressive personality. After treatment with medication failed, the doctors discussed shock therapy with him and his wife. After being informed that the treatment does not always work and that the effects of the treatment often stifle creativity, they both agreed to it and Steven signed a consent form. The treatment proved successful for several months. Steven’s behavior stabilized, and he was able to return to his writing. After a few months, the symptoms began to return, and Steven found he could not write for weeks at a time. He began to believe he would not be able to complete his latest novel. The main character in this novel was a young, manic-depressive artist struggling with his psychological condition and his art. As his frustration grew his behavior grew more erratic and he began abusing his wife. Their marriage ended shortly after. With regard to these facts, explain whether or not the following statements are true.
- a) That very month the latest edition of “Psychology Today” had an article on research showing that shock treatment therapy had only temporary results. Steven can sue the hospital and doctor for “battery” because his consent was not fully informed.
- b) The doctor could not be sued successfully for negligence because Steven came in with a problem and his condition was actually improved for a time period before returning to its usual condition. Steven was informed of the dangers to his creativity, but his work actually improved after the operation.
- c) The wife could sue for damages as a result of the breakdown of the marriage even though the procedure was not performed on her, but on her husband.
- d) Steven can sue because the doctor should have been aware that there was a chance that a temporary (and not a permanent) change might occur and that would cause him to start a novel and then not finish it, and then get frustrated and then abuse his wife.
- The Plaintiff, Donald Thomas, quit his job because his employer, Karen Kory, made unwelcome sexual advances and his career was not advanced as promised. Subsequently, on her own initiative, Ms. Kory contacted Donald’s past employer, his present employer and an instructor at a vocational school where he attended at nights for skills upgrading (computer programming) and said that Donald was gay, and that he had stolen some computer equipment from the workplace, both false statements. As a result, Donald was called into the office of his present employer (Ms. Spord, an old school mate of Ms. Kory) and was asked to respond to the accusations. Donald insisted that the statements were false and that Ms. Kory was getting revenge for being refused. Donald’s present employer did not believe him and Donald lost his job. On these facts, discuss whether or not the following statements are true.
- a) Kory could successfully sue Donald for Defamation of character.
- b) Donald could sue his former employer for sexual harassment?
- c) Donald could sue his former employer for defamation?
- d) Kory would have a successful defense against a tort claim from Donald on the basis of qualified privilege. What about the defense of fair comment?