1.1 Significant facts found between Barnard Building (BB) and Happy Construction (HC)
- HC negotiated with BB and was successful in winning the contract.
- BB sent the offer letter to HC with detailed term and conditions via post.
- HC sent a counter offer via post. No communication is made from BB afterwards.
- HC signed a contract with Edward Building Specialists (EBS), and sent a letter to BB to withdraw their acceptance.
- BB threatened to take legal action against HC.
1.2 Significant facts found Between EBS and HC
- HC signed the contract with EBS.to build steel structure for a high rise building.
- HC emailed a scanned version of the signed contract documents to EBS.
- Also HC sent the original signed documents to EBS via courier.
- Contract Clauses 5 and 10 are related to employeesâ€™ health and safety and milestones of the project in order as given in the scenario.
- HC circulated EBSâ€™s health and safety procedures among all employees. All the employees did not read but signed a document confirming they have understood the policies.
- Wearing safety harness and being clipped on the safety rail is one of those procedures while working at height.
- One of HCâ€™s employees fell down from the height and became paraplegic, as it was second fall and most serious. As the result EBS decided to terminate HC.
1.3 Significant facts found Between Susan and HC
- Susan is ;">HCâ€™s employee working as a steel welder.
- Health and safety procedures were circulated to her as well.
- Always she unclipped her from the safety rail while moving one section to the next, as being clipped while moving was impractical.
- She did not inform to anyone about that or did not listen her colleagueâ€™s advice.
- She fell down while unclipped and became paraplegic.
2. Advice to HC by considering events occurred between BB and HCA negotiation is a formal discussion between people who are trying to reach an agreement. While two parties are engaged on negotiation there will be a lot of bargain on the offer until the â€œmeeting of mindsâ€ is reached. Parties can halt the negotiation at any levels, either initial or matured stage, if the meeting of minds is not reached. Sometimes this will cause disputes, because one party may think that other party has agreed a contract with them while other party will be thinking that they are still negotiating on the offer. In the given scenario, there is no such misunderstanding from BB, because the scenario says â€œHC was successful in winning the contract and BB prepared the offer letter with detailed terms and conditions of the proposed contract.â€ A contract is a legally binding or valid agreement between two parties. Generally a contract can be agreed either orally or in writing. A legally binding agreement includes,
- The intention to create legal relations
- Legal capacity
- Consideration (in English Law)
3. Advice to HC by considering events occurred between BB and HC
- Richard Stone, The Modern Law of Contract, 10th ed, Routledge, Oxon,2013
- Fafinski, S & Finch E, Law Express: Contract Law (Revision Guide), Pearson Education: 2012
- McKendrick, Contract Law, Text & materials 2003
4.2 ELECTRONIC SOURCES
- The law hand book, your practical guide to the law in Victoriaâ€™ <http://www.lawhandbook.org.au/handbook/ch12s01s01.php> accessed 10 January 2015.
- Magazine insite law, Daily online law news and law blogsâ€™ <http://www.insitelawmagazine.com/ch4acceptance.htm> accessed 10 January 2015.
- Nolo, Law for all, Consideration: Every Contract Needs Itâ€™ <http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/consideration-every-contract-needs-33361.html> accessed 10 January 2015.
- Sarah Cole, â€˜Mersey Docks & Harbour Board v. Coggings & Griffithsâ€™ <http://www.safetyphoto.co.uk/subsite/case m n o p/Mersey Docks v. Coggins & Griffiths.htm> accessed 31 December 2013.
- Edwards v Skyways Ltd.  1 WLR 349
- Harvey v Facey  UKPC 1,  AC 552
- Pickfords Ltd v Celestica Ltd -  All ER (D) 265 (Nov)
- Byrne & Co v Leon Van Tien Hoven & Co  5 CPD 344
- Routledge v Grant (1828) 4 Bing 653.
- Prenn v Simmonds  1 WLR 1381
4.4 STATUTORY PROVISIONS
- Companies Act 1996
- Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989, s.1
- Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977(UTCA) S2 & S14
- Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations 1992/2966
- Health and Safety act 1974
- Occupiers Liability Act
 â€œClause 5. Happy Construction must ensure that all of their employees are informed and abide by EBS health and safety policies at all times whilst on site. Any breach of this clause will result in Happy Construction assuming all liability for any tortious acts resulting from the breach.â€ â€œClause 10. Happy Construction undertake to meet all milestones. Failure to do so where there is no reasonable reason for the delay, will result in the EBS having the right to terminate the contract immediately.â€  Oxford advanced learnerâ€™s dictionary 8th edition  Harvey v Facey  UKPC 1,  AC 552  This is statement will be contrasted further below  http://www.lawhandbook.org.au/handbook/ch12s01s01.php  Edwards v Skyways Ltd.  1 WLR 349.  http://www.insitelawmagazine.com/ch4acceptance.htm  http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/consideration-every-contract-needs-33361.html  McKendrick, Contract Law, Text & materials 2003  BSM 743 Lectures Notes Topic 4: Introduction to Contractual Obligations & Formalities  Pickfords Ltd v Celestica Ltd -  All ER (D) 265 (Nov)  Byrne & Co v Leon Van Tien Hoven & Co  5 CPD 344  Routledge v Grant (1828) 4 Bing 653.  Prenn v Simmonds  1 WLR 1381