Law of Contract

Question:

Due to the rampant robbery in which the robbers used ski masks to cover their faces, the Cyberjaya Authority issued a regulation that makes it illegal to sell ski masks. As a safety measure, the rule also makes it illegal for anyone to offer for sale the ski masks. In spite of this, Messy has not cleared the ski masks from the shelves of his sport equipment shop in Cyberia. The authority officials came to know about this and later on charged Messy under the new regulation. Advise Messy according to Contract Act 1950 and relevant decided case(s).

Answer:

In the case above, Messy have been charged due to the display of item which is ski mask in his shop. Under the new regulation, it is illegal for anyone to offer for sale the ski masks. There is no binding contract between any parties and Messy in the case above. Therefore, Messy cannot be charged by the authority under the new regulation.

This is because in the first place, under the Contract Act 1950, it requires offer and acceptance and consideration for a contract to exist. In this case, by selling the ski mask can only amount to an offer due to the lack of the trade, there are no acceptance and consideration for the buyer's part. This can be seen in the case of Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britian v Boots Cash Chemists. The seller has the right to stop the purchase if the items are not suitable to be sold. If the buyers decided to buy it, and the seller accepts their payment or the offer, then it will be considered as against the new regulation. But as for the case above, Messy did not accept any payment or offer from anyone, therefore, it cannot be charged under the new regulation. There is no offer and acceptance in the case above.

In the case of Fisher v Bell, display of any goods with a price tag on it in a shop was not an offer but rather was an invitation to treat. Since it is just an invitation to treat, the Contracts Act 1950 might not applicable to this case. Messy has not done anything wrong that obey that law.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Doctrine of Stare Decisis

According to Wikipedia.com, Doctrine of Stare Decisis is the English system of precedent which is based on the Latin maxim: "Stare Decisis et Non Queita Movere", stand by what has been decided and do not unsettle the established. The idea is that by following precedents, which are the previous decisions of judges, fairness and certainty will be provided.

There are several advantages for Doctrine of Stare Decisis. One of the advantages is time-saving where it can avoids unnecessary litigation. Besides that, it also leads to an orderly development of the law. Only the Lords can overrule it's previous decisions and the hierarchy of the courts ensures that lower courts follow higher courts. Greater certainty in the law also one of the advantages where it is the most important advantage claimed for the doctrine of judicial precedent. It allow persons generally to order their affairs and come to settlements with a certain amounts of confidence. Lastly, it can become thoughtless where the convenience of following precedent should not be allowed to degenerate into a mere mechanical exercise performed without any thought.

Next is the disadvantages of Doctrine of Stare Decisis which are rigidity, complexity, illogical reasoning and slow to grow. Rigidity which mean bad principle is binding where judicial is limit. As for complexity, it increases the costs and time taken for litigation through research. Illogical reasoning which mean the differences between some cases may be very small and appear illogical. According to http://members.multimania.co.uk/lawnet/PRECED.HTM, it written that illogical distinctions are made to avoid precedents. Lastly, is the slow to grow which mean some areas of the law are unclear or in need to reform.

Tutorial 1

The question is:

Ryan called and talked on the phone with his wife without using the use of hands-free device while driving his car back home in Georgetown. While talking, he lost control over his car and eventually hit a walking pedestrian.

Is Ryan liable under civil or criminal law? In my opinion, Ryan is liable under civil law where civil law involved between people with people. Civil law is more like a private law that involved 2 people such as contract law. As for criminal law, it is against the law and will get prosecuted by the government. If the walking pedestrian died in this accident, Ryan is liable under criminal law where criminal law is involved with the government and the people. Once there are people dead in the accident, criminal law will be applied. Therefore, in this case, Ryan will only be liable under civil law.

Should this case go to court, what will be Ryan's right?

No, this case should not bring into the court. This is because Ryan will be sued under the Law of Torts for Negligence. According to Wikipedia.com, it written that there are 5 elements of negligence claims which are duty of care, breach of duty, factual causation, legal causation or remoteness and harm. Besides that, Ryan will also be charged by the government for dangerous driving.

What should the pedestrian do to recover his injuries or loss?

The pedestrian can sued Ryan under the Law of Torts for Negligence. If the pedestrian injured because of Ryan acted negligently that cause the pedestrian's injury, he can recover the damages to compensate for his harm.

By doing research on the civil law, I found that there are actually have two types of law which are civil law and common law. http://www.infernalramblings.com/articles/Law/401/

There are differences between this two laws. The basic difference is: Civil law is a law system where all the laws are made by the parliament in the country. As for common law, some laws are made of customs and some are by parliaments. Based on Johnleemk, the writer for the above website, it said that "the common law system is predominant throughout the Commonwealth of Nations, thanks to their shared British heritage. Most former British heritage colonies derive their laws from the same common laws as England ( the common law is actually a thoroughly English creature - the Scots and Irish were not subject to this system)".

Now proceed to another case. Question is:

Geena runs an unregistered online investment portal from her home in KL where she managed to get people deposit money to her account. It was discovered that the investment was a scam and she attempted to flee with the money, only to be arrested in the airport by immigration officers because she held a fake passport.

Determine Geena's liability: civil or criminal?

Geena is liable under criminal law, fraudulent act. This is because she is running away with the money, fraudulent of making scam. According to Wikipedia.com, Fraud can be committed through several methods such as mail, wire, phone and the internet ( computer crime and internet fraud). There are many types of fraudulent acts including bait and switch, false billing, false advertising, identity fraud and so on.

What law(s) and statutes you think Geena has violated?

Geena holding a fake passport, therefore she was violated with immigration act. Immigration is one of the act under criminal law.