Fundamentals of Australian Contract law

Alphafarm v Toll Parole Evidence Rule

White antsSecond hand carsDrycleaningCarparksPossum & Millie

Intro / revisionA discussion about consensus / Fitness First v Chong and the Rule in L'Strange v GraucobWhy is it important to identify terms?Discussion about equitable remediesLuna Park v TramwaysJJ SavageAnd more

We covered a range of things - these tutorials are driven by your questions: citations/referencing in the exam;why does consideration move from the promissee?If Elliot, who is 4, entered into a contract with me to purchase a race track, and I didn't hand over the race track, could he sue me?how do the past consideration and part payment of a debt 'rules' fit together? And that's just what I remember this morning.

Brought to you by the RMITLSS, facilitated by Cathryn Nolan with special guest Anastasia Stepanovic, Legal Research and Training Librarian Maddocks and President of the Victorian Chapter of the Australian Law Librarian's Association. To access the 'annotated agenda' - including links to the websites and library databases discussed, see: https://share.mindmanager.com/#publish/cY0KpJE0AmIf6P6GzgeoFDz0pam3NYN4ZKnpys8U Note: you will need RMIT credentials to access all areas.

As we now have to record classes in Collaborate Ultra there is less ability to edit / cut up lectures easily (and less motivation to be frank). Version with video are available in Canvas.

We are now required to record in collaborate ultra rather than Zoom. This means I have less ability (and inclination!) to edit the recordings. You will find the video and slidepack in Canvas.

More from the time capsule... 00:00 - Introduction 00:35 - Commercial Transactions 01:53 - Agreements to agree are never binding 05:12 - Commercial Transactions – Honour Clauses Textbook: 5.20 08:34 - Commercial Transactions 17:00 - Letters of Comfort :  19:20 - Banque Brussels v Australian National Industries Ltd 25:44 - Contrasting Results 27:42 - Kleinwort Benson Ltd v Malaysian Mining Corp Bhd (1989) CA, UK 32:58 - Preliminary Agreements 39:10 - Three Categories in Masters v Cameron (textbook [5.70]) 43:03 - Preliminary Agreements 43:56 - Recent Cases - Pavlovic v Universal Music Australia Pty Limited (2015) 90 NSWLR 60 45:29 - Recent Cases: Edward Ted Lakis and Anor v Michael Victor Lardis and Anor [2017] NSWSC 321 47:47 - Lakis v Lardis – per Sakar J 47:48 - Ask “What is the meaning of what the parties have said?”, rather than “What did the parties mean to say?” 48:36 - Overview: Intention to create legal relations

Unfortunately we had all sorts of trouble with the livestream class - thank you to those who were there and so patient and undertstanding - so this is a recording of last semester's class on the same topic. 00:00 - Introduction 00:23 - Week six – Semester two 02:45 - What do we cover in this topic? 02:48 - Overview: Intention to create legal relations 06:45 - Intention 09:33 - Objective Test: Did the parties manifest an intention to create legal relations? 12:19 - Lord Denning MR: Merritt v Merritt 12:39 - What factors are taken into account (to determine whether the parties intended a legal relationship)? 16:30 - Presumptions 17:19 - Doubt about the utility of Presumptions 21:14 - __ “… not only is there obvious difficulty in formulating rules intended to prescribe the kinds of cases in which an intention to create contractual relations should, or should not, be found to exist, it would be wrong to do so.”

Mainly we discussed the assignment - word count, referencing, finding cases, structure.... and cats.

You can find the problem and a quiz with the questions in Canvas

Not sure how this one will translate to Audio Only! This is a recording of a class activity - with a number of hiccoughs along the way due to the livestream nature of the class!

Table of Contents: 00:00 - Introduction 00:48 - Quiz / problems… I’m making a change 04:30 - Consideration 05:59 - Learning objectives 07:33 - Past Consideration 08:34 - Past Consideration Rule 10:00 - Roscorla v Thomas 11:53 - Exceptions: Lampleigh v Braithwait 14:21 - Exceptions: Ipex Software Services Pty Ltd v Hosking 16:26 - Existing Legal Duty Rule 16:48 - Let’s start with the rule: Existing Legal Duty 21:00 - Performance of a Public Duty 21:36 - Glasbrook Bros Ltd v Glamorgan County Council (1956) 2 All ER 318 24:23 - Part Payment of a Debt: Rule in Pinnel’s Case 31:39 - Foakes v Beer 36:40 - Promises to third parties - Hirachand Punamchand v Temple [1911] 2 KB 330 40:46 - Atco Controls Pty Ltd (in liq) v Newtronics Pty Ltd 42:36 - Exception: Pao On v Lau You Long 44:23 - Per Scarman LJ: 45:55 - Existing Contract with Promisor – is there fresh consideration? 49:59 - Compromise and forbearance to sue 51:13 - What are the issues? 52:48 - The Practical Benefit Exception 56:38 - Practical Benefit Exception in Australia 1:01:19 - Exceptions to the Rule in Pinnel’s Case 1:01:36 - Exceptions to Existing Legal Duty Rule

Discussion includes Kirby J's reasons for the requirement of consideration as discussed in Woolworths v Kelly

In this part of the class recording we discuss AWM and Beaton v McDivitt

Thanks to those who attended. Unfortunately the sound quality is not excellent - a problem of bandwith in these crazy times! We discussed a whole lot of things, including: the assignmentciting casesthinking about researchagreement / consensusand other stuff

Brinkibon v Stahag Stahl Some key take aways Some end of class Q&A

In this one I provide a brief outline of Machon Paull v Empirnall Holdings - we mention Felthouse v Bindley as well, but for more information about that one go back to the Topic 3 pre class quiz where I discuss it in more detail.

What in practice does it look like to communicate acceptance? In this brief excerpt of the class we look at Latec Finance v Knight

How is a unilateral offer accepted? Does the offeree need to be aware of the offer in order to accept it. We look at R v Clarke in this short case overview.

A brief case note - the principle is known as the Rule in L'Strange v Graucob - which we will come back to much later in the semester. The case is important to understand the importance of a signed document even when there is no meeting of the minds (consensus ad idem)

A very brief case study - this case helps us understand the way that the courts apply an objective test to determining whether a person has accepted an offer.

What's in this recording 00:00 - What is Acceptance? 05:07 - Acceptance - Formula 05:33 - Some issues that arise: 07:09 - Rules on Acceptance 22:04 - Approaches to Acceptance (objective test) 25:16 - How courts determine whether acceptance has occurred

Not sure how this one will work without the pictures, but try playing along at home if you can!

Table of Contents: 00:00 - Introduction 09:05 - Lapse of offers 09:25 - Failure of condition 09:41 - Rejection 10:46 - Counter offer

Further to a question that was asked on Saturdays lecture - expanding on the issues.

Explains the basis on which a time was selected - 7:30pm on Saturdays. Note at the end is supposed to make you feel relaxed about whether you attend or not.

What is covered in this podcast? Distinguishing an offer from other conduct 00:02 - Why do we need to distinguish? 02:34 - Issues arising with invitations 03:23 - Offers versus invitations to treat 03:25 - Fisher v Bell [1961] 1 QB 394 (see Canvas for a link) 03:25 - Offers versus invitations to treat 03:29 - Issues arising with invitations 03:32 - Why do we need to distinguish? 03:34 - Issues arising with invitations 03:35 - Offers versus invitations to treat 03:40 - Fisher v Bell [1961] 1 QB 394 (see Canvas for a link) 07:59 - Partridge v Crittenden [1968] 2 All ER 421 09:12 - __ Boots Cash Chemists 09:24 - Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) [1953] 1 QB 401 11:08 - What was the issue? 12:00 - Arguments 12:56 - Findings 14:21 - Auctions & Tenders 14:40 - Real Estate Auction 17:00 - Real Estate Auction – general rule 17:08 - Real Estate Auction without reserve 17:32 - Tenders 18:45 - Harvela 23:55 - Supply of Information 24:44 - About the discussion board task

What's in this podcast Identifying when a contract has been formed in order to determine whether written conditions form part of the offer (and therefore the contract) 00:15 - MacRobertson v Commissioner of State Taxation (WA) (1975) 133 CLR 125 03:12 - MacRobertson v Commissioner of State Tax: Issue 03:18 - Airline (MacRobertson) Arguments 04:37 - Held: Ticket does not record terms of agreement, rather the terms of an offer subsequently accepted by conduct. The lack of any obligation imposed on the airline prevented the ticket from representing an enforceable agreement 07:20 - Distinguishing an offer from other conduct 07:29 - Why do we need to distinguish? 07:32 - Distinguishing an offer from other conduct 08:35 - Held: Ticket does not record terms of agreement, rather the terms of an offer subsequently accepted by conduct. The lack of any obligation imposed on the airline prevented the ticket from representing an enforceable agreement Note - some questions were raised and I said I'd get back to the students. These are addressed in Episode 14 (Topic 2, Revisiting MacRobertsons Case)

Australian Woollen Mills v Cwth – demonstrates the link between offer, acceptance and consideration 02:59 - Unilateral Offers - Principles

A brief overview of the differences.

What's in this podcast? 00:00 - Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co [1893] 1 QB 256 02:22 - The (material) facts 03:13 - The advertisement 04:53 - Issues 06:33 - The Defendants Arguments 08:04 - The plaintiff’s arguments 11:12 - Judgement

What's in this podcast 00:00 - Gibson v Manchester City Council [1979] 1 WLR 294 1:19 - Letter from the council 02:36 - Gibson completed the application 03:04 - The issue 03:40 - Gibson’s arguments 04:11 - What test did the court apply? 05:22 - Let’s look at the council’s letter again 15:02 - Conclusions 15:45 - Was the decision fair?

What's in this podcast? 00:00 - Introduction 00:19 - Contract problem solving 02:57 - To determine whether there is a contract, we need to determine whether all the formation elements are present. 04:00 - Think about.. 04:19 - Problem solving: 05:15 - Topic 2 – Agreement: Offer 05:19 - Working through issues of agreement 07:11 - Nature of Agreement 09:54 - In a nutshell…. 10:47 - __ So let’s get stuck in: Offer 10:53 - Nature of Offer 20:05 - __ “An offer is the manifestation of willingness to enter into a bargain, so made as to justify another person in understanding that his assent to that bargain is invited and will conclude it.”

You can do this quiz in canvas. We work through the questions and I comment on the answers.

What's in this podcast: 00:00 - Introduction 00:11 - Framework for our approach 01:21 - Defining a contract 02:26 - The noun v the verb 08:55 - Why should promises be enforced? 09:11 - What do you think? 09:11 - Presentation Paused 15:04 - A timeline 19:02 - What is private law? 20:34 - Legal Personality 22:36 - Contract v Tort 23:01 - Contract v Equity 27:56 - Statute & Contract 30:09 - International influences (and a particul 33:47 - Elements of contracts 35:15 - Vitiating Factors 39:28 - Classifications 39:40 - Presentation Resumed 39:40 - What was the last contract you entered into about? 39:42 - What do you think? 41:14 - Simple Contract v Formal Contract 43:17 - Void/Voidable 44:12 - Executed / Executory 45:20 - What should you read for Topic 1? 47:25 - Can contracts be enforced against minors

The first part of our first face to face lecture - starting with a bit of a tech hiccough, hopefully the worst we'll encounter this semester. Marked explicit because I've been known to drop the odd rude word and I was a little stressed!

This is a recording of our first tutorial for Semester 1, 2020. It's an overview of what to expect in this class and how to prepare. A video recording is also available on Youtube. Oh, and the word I couldn't think of (at around 40 minutes in!) was "Certainty".... the IRONY!! (The sound quality was even worse before a very handsome man fixed it for me. It's better now. #BeLikeStephen)