Loading 
Bonanza Offer FLAT 20% off & $20 sign up bonus Order Now
Business law covers several fields of operations including corporation law, industrial relation and commercial law, business buying contracts and intellectual property exchange. Simply, a contract is an understanding of buying or exchanging business operations in certain conditions, those seem satisfactory from both of the parties (Mierzewski, 2010). A contract always follows a written document or oral contract and set agendas those are managed in front of legal solicitors or authoritative evidence. Contract parties face a tort or breach of contract while disobeying set norms. In order to avoid all of these glitches, there are always preparations of due diligence. There are three major areas of due diligence including legal, commercial and financial. A lease or a contract between solicitor and clients mean to follow business laws and risk assessment concerns to avoid threats (Park, 2013). The purpose of this assignment is to discuss different business contract laws. The implication of laws and regulations are available while buying or making a sale of business points. The present case study of Emily and Laila includes implications of legal norms facing a dispute in the contract. A professional relation between clients and solicitors is the initial stage where considerations and implications of Retail Leases Act 1994 and other regulations of contract work.
Business contracts are supposed to be complex and it is important to understand the inclusion of norms and future implications. In order to understand terms and contract details, it is always prescribed to get the assistance of legal heads and solicitors. Practically, engaged parties make business contracts and understandings, but solicitors will annexe the terms with legal prospects. In the present context, Emile and Laila have hired a solicitor to help understand the norms and they may have omitted the chapter of demolition and authority of the shopping centre owner while implementing relocation of the business centre or other possible changes to the infrastructure (Beale, 2010). Australian Retail Leases Act of 1994 Sec 35 supports the fact if documentation of contract holds such considerations and signed by both the parties, they are bound to follow instructions for avoiding the breach. As mentioned in the case study, Emily and Laila are unaware of such terms included in the document and it may possible that the respective solicitor has also made the same mistake. They have acquired the Cafe a few months ago and Dentro, the shopping centre owner wishes to demolish the infrastructure. Hence, according to the agreement, Dentro has the clause to make such operations, but at the same time, business buyers will face a great loss of money. If it is a matter of providing compensation, Dentro will be out of the context as buyers have already make the agreement along with the prevailing norm of demolition in need. Here, the role and negligence of the solicitor are clearly reflected and the respective buyers can make a claim for compensation based on the tort of negligence and breach of contract instead of having an interference of legal professional (Kiazad, 2014).
According to Retail Leases Act 1994 Section 35, A small business leasehold has several conditions when there is a matter of termination of property or demolition. In the present context, the cafe shop has the provision to be demolished as there is a clause included in the agreement. In this concern, there are three possible effects possible according to provision:
In the present context, Emily and Laila cannot operate such steps as they are going to experience a greater loss. However, in the case of compensation, they have the right now to claim the solicitor for compensation. If there was a certain clause of demolition and the solicitor had not informed buyers before making the agreement, there will be applicable legislation of negligence and breach of contract between client and solicitor (Feldman, 2010). A lesser is only bound to pay compensation for the lessee while having a condition merged within the agreement. It may happen that a lesser can place a termination notice for a renovation or other infrastructure related works, but a notice has to be placed in right time. Emily and Laila have left all of such opportunities as Dentro occupies the right to make such operations.
Based on the agreement, there is the least chance of getting a help support from Dentro, the shopping centre owner, but in order to make a supplementary business point or solution, they may claim for a certain time. In Retail Leases Act of 1994, a lesser cannot force a lessee for making a replacement and the legal time should be three months as prescribed by law. The fault of such mishaps is solely levied upon buyers as they have provided least importance and measures to read and understand the agreement, but in this present case study, it was the hired solicitor who had made all of the contractual operations. Based on the same responsibility, Emily and Laila can make a direct claim or penalty to the solicitor for negligence in legal responsibility and the tort of the business contract. According to the case of Skiing and Trust Company Limited, a tenant or lessee is only liable to pay compensation or carry the responsibility of termination if there are any written documents made in the agreement. In various hearings of the courts, Skiwing’s liability to contribute resources has been rejected. This case and the solution were like a satisfactory support for retail property owners as the decisions of Court of appeal introduced the practice of outgoing checklist in an agreement disclosure.
However, the incurred loss will be entirely entertained by the business buyers, the responsibility of the breach is entirely levied on the solicitor. In the Retail Leases Act of 1994, there are several norms that one can claim a solicitor or legal adviser in case of financial loss damage of property, misconduct in engagement and hide important facts of contract. It is not possible that an individual is always aware of legal norms while making a sale or lease of contract. In this concern (Hua, 2015), it is the responsibility of a solicitor or legal advisor to provide complete assistance and legal support, so that there will be least possibility of breach and tort of negligence by any of the party (Mackie, 2013). Australian business law provides some specific circumstances that a business buyer or seller can place a claim for compensation. In this case study, there is a perfect match of the same instance. Emily and Laila have not found a sustainable and quality support of the solicitor and finally, they have to face a demolition of the business property. Likewise, there are some other conditions when individual business owners can make a compensation claim against solicitors and legal advisors. A legal practitioner can be accused of liability in some cases of poor legal advice, wrong contract decisions, inefficient agreement causing breach or tort, dishonesty, fraud, delay in operation and overcharging of legal support.
A lawyer’s liability is not only to make agreements, but it is one type of contracts or understanding that bring a successful conduct of business agreement. In the case of Badenach & Anor v Calvert 2015, the court appeal, Australia has clearly stated that a justified duty of solicitor always tends to support beneficiary in a logical sense. A validating agreement always has the surveillance of a solicitor and in a case of gaps or least concerns to any of the parties defines negligence of responsibility and claim for compensation by any of the party engaged in a contract (Mercer, 2014). In the respective case, the solicitor has become unable to economic interest and the beneficiary has faced the loss. In the case of Hill v Van Erp element of control is totally absent and Court of appeal has made the decision based on the same.
Emily and Laila have found glitches in the contract due to negligence of solicitor and Section 35 of Retail Leases Act specifies different situations when tort of contract and blames can be made on solicitor’s advice. Such conditions of claiming for a negotiation that Emily and Laila can charge the legal advisor include nature of obligation, relationship between parties, circumstances and damage of property (Hartkamp, 2011). Nature of obligation is the important factor to be analysed while making a claim. Emily and Laila had also made a legal contract with the solicitor to be assisted by beneficial supports and having an agreement both of the parties are liable to face obligations (Samuel, 2010). According to Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977, valid obligations always tend to make compensation to the claimant and in that concern; the respective buyers have a chance to get compensation due to the negligence of the solicitor.
Implied terms in a contract service refer to implications of general rules that enhance the sustainability of understanding and avoid breaches or tort of negligence. According to section 35 of Retail Leases Act, there are some basic norms, those are to be implemented within a contract and these norms are known as expectations to general rule. These norms include evidence or presence of a validate person, valid nature of contract, legal record of oral and written documents and an evidence to define agreement status in case of breaches (Wellin, 2016). In the present context, Emily and Laila have hired solicitor support for representing evidence and other legal implications, but the breaches are found due to the negligence of the solicitor. In support of the above terms, the general rule of the contract specifies guidelines in order to maintain all of the protective margins. As for example while making a written statement, there will be the collateral contract, promissory statement, the specification of contract and promissory statement, avoiding contradiction and overall consent of both parties (Fried, 2015). It seems that while making the business contract both parties have not contributed entire consents and as a result the demolish clause has remained hidden from certain heads.
NCAT is a legal advisory body that deals with business and contract related complaints placed in course of disputes. There are certain conditions and norms in order to place a complaint that should be taken under considerations (Becker, 2015). The two sides of disputes are known as applicant and respondent. Here, in the present case study, Emily and Laila will be the applicants if they decide to place a complaint against the respective solicitor in the dispute caused by the negligence of responsibility. The solicitor will be treated as the respondent and it may possible that several enforcement orders may be directed by NCAT (Bishop, 2014). These enforcement orders include payment of compensation, the order of termination or tenancy agreement and other relevant implications based on applications and claims. There are two options available for the respective applicants. The first one will be placing of a legal claim against the solicitor or secondly seeking for a settlement of the dispute with compensation. It is important to prepare logical complaints and other necessary evidence before placing a complaint in front of NACT otherwise it will be rejected. A small business commissioner can better interfere the disputes analysing resources and certain proofs. It can be measured as prior analysis to find accused based on the agreements. However, a small business commissioner has the right to handle and fix business disputes out of the court.
Moreover, Emily and Laila have certain resources that they can make a compensation claim against the solicitor for negligence. The important fact is those buyers have to produce several pieces of evidence that they were not informed about demolition clause mentioned in the agreement. On the other hand, while making an in NCAT, an oral as well as written proof has to be produced by the buyers for validating the claim. In Sec 35 of Retail Leases Act, it is also a responsibility of the parties to analyse entire contract details before making an agreement. Based on the same, the solicitor can produce a reverse charge in order to prove the applicant’s claim as invalid, but Emily and Laila have a better possibility to get compensation even by engaging the shopping owner.
Anderson, J. (2014). Professional Negligence, Solicitors: Recent Case Law, 2014. Queen's University Belfast Law Research Paper, (2014-04).
Beale, H., Tallon, D., Vogenauer, S., Rutgers, J. W., & Fauvarque-Cosson, B. (2010). Cases, materials and text on contract law. Hart.
Becker, D. S., Pittman, L. L., Wilson, D., Cates, V., Sirignano, M. A., Tiscione, F. P., & Bholan, M. A. (2015). Recent Developments in Business Litigation. Tort Trial & Insurance Practice Law Journal, 50(2), 277.
Bishop, E. (2014). Practice and procedure: NCAT's new procedures. Law Society Journal: the official journal of the Law Society of New South Wales,52(4), 33.
Feldman, S. W., & Fioravanti, R. (2010). Contract dispute or bid protest? The" delex systems" dilemma. Public Contract Law Journal, 39(3), 483-537.
Fried, C. (2015). Contract as promise: A theory of contractual obligation. Oxford University Press, USA.
Hartkamp, A. S., Hesselink, M. W., Hondius, E. H., Mak, C., & Perron, C. E. (2011). Towards a European civil code.-4th rev. and exp. Kluwer law international.
Hua, L. (2015). Analysis of Business Contract Risk Burden Rules——The Question of The Principle of Delivery.
Kiazad, K., Seibert, S. E., & Kraimer, M. L. (2014). Psychological contract breach and employee innovation: A conservation of resources perspective.Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 87(3), 535-556.
Mackie, K. J., & Mackie, K. (Eds.). (2013). A handbook of dispute resolution: ADR in action. Routledge.
Mercer, H. (2014). Retailer–supplier relationships before and after the Resale Prices Act, 1964: A turning point in British economic history?. Enterprise and Society, 15(01), 132-165.
Mierzewski, M. B., DeSimone, B. S., Hochberg, J. W., & Larkin, B. P. (2010). Dodd-Frank Act Establishes the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection as the Primary Regulatory of Consumer Financial Products and Services, The. Banking lJ, 127, 722.
Park, J. (2013). Commercial: Temporary custodians. Journal (Real Estate Institute of New South Wales), 64(10), 24.
Samuel, G. (2010). Law of obligations. Edward Elgar.
Smyth, C. (2014). Succession law: Solicitor wins appeal on will'negligence'.Proctor, The, 34(9), 22.
Wellin, M. (2016). Managing the psychological contract: Using the personal deal to increase business performance. CRC Press.
The No. 1 assignment writing help provider in the United Kingdom, MyAssignmentHelp.co.uk is now better than ever. With the custom assignment writing services, 24x7 online support and 4000+ in-house PhD writers MyAssignmentHelp.co.uk now offers you unparalleled assignment help which will not only save you from hours of hard work but will also ensure you achieve the academic milestones which you have always dreamt of.
Upload your Assignment and improve Your Grade
Boost Grades
