Analyze Whether William has to Pay Josephine $65,000 by 28th February

Analyze Whether William has to Pay Josephine $65,000 by 28^th February

From my analysis, William should not pay Josephine $65,000 because of the agreement that Josephine made with William after William due to the fact was experiencing a lot of financial challenges.  This can be well understood by looking in-depth on what a contract is. A contract is an agreement between two or more party which has legally binding effects on its parties (Wong, Michael & Richard, 65). This means that after making an agreement, the parties involved are bound by the law to stick to what they agreed no matter what the circumstances. This agreement between William and Josephine had all the elements needed to form a contract, that is an offer, acceptance, intention and consideration; therefore, it should not be breached.

William made an expression of his intentions to Josephine to have a legally binding agreement. She agreed that since William was facing a lot of financial difficulties, she will consider reducing the price to $65,000. Usually, it is required by the contract law that before you accept an offer, you should be absolutely sure of the consequences of accepting the offer. No one is required to accept any offer that at the end of the day or when the results of their acceptance to the proposal are out, he or she will come out to complain about the same issue that they agreed (Wong, Michael & Richard, 65). Before Josephine accepted to offer the property to William, she is required by the law to look at all these possibilities that before the termination of the contract one might get some money by good luck and she should purpose in her mind that no matter what the circumstance she will not change her plans concerning the terms of the contract. Acceptance of the agreement should also have made Josephine not think of increasing the price once again. This is because once a businessman or a businesswoman is seen not to be stable in making price decisions and that such things move him or her as of William she will not gain trust from the customers any more. A right business person needs to stick to what he or she accepted and that is why it is advised that you look at all these possibilities before taking the contract. Josephine fulfilled this element of the agreement; therefore, she has got no right to come and change her plans later because of good financial luck that William experienced. Also, Josephine should have analyzed the intentions that William had before talking to her to reduce the price for him. William had no evil plans, but he had utterly genuine reasons as to why he could not manage to pay the initial amount. Were it because of some scrupulous intentions then I think Josephine should have an excellent idea to counter the offer.

Another reason why William needs to pay the same amount they agreed to pay before is that it will teach Josephine a lesson that will help her to guard and maintain her reputation. Everybody would always like to do business with people who are reliable and people who can stick to their words no matter what the situation. Allowing Josephine to change the pans of the whole process will only create fear and distrust that will eventually cause a lot of Josephine’s customers to vanish away. If William sticks to paying the $65,000, the next time Josephine decides this will always take into consideration all these possibilities and that she will likely to be making informed decisions knowing that circumstances might change any time and that she must be ready to flow with anything that comes her way. Reputation in business is critical and it comes from such things as sticking to your word (Wong, Michael & Richard, 65). William should also pay the same $65,000 as agreed before to make Josephine avoid further misinterpretation of agreements in future and also as a lesson to business people to avoid misinterpretation has been one of the significant challenges people are experiencing in the business world. People should never misinterpret and misunderstand that contract terms would change depending on the change of financial life of one of the parties of the contract. Whether or not one of the party experiences financial breakthroughs, both parties should be able to stick to what they agreed earlier on. So, to some extent also William should stick to the contract terms as before just to instil these insights to Josephine.

Question 1 b. Analyze What Remedies, if any, Susan is Entitled to from Company A

A contract is an agreement between two or more parties which creates certain legal obligations. If one or more parties to a contract do not perform according to the terms of the agreement, then there is a breach of a contract. There was an agreement between Susan and company A to make the whole system soundproof because of the challenge of making noise to other people on the other rooms (Malik, Muhammad & Naveed, 67). Company A, however, did not do as per the required standards.  There are therefore, five types of remedies for breach of contract are that Suzan is entitled to and they include money damages, restitution, rescission, reformation, and specific performance.

To begin with, monetary damage, company A which in our case is the breaching party, needs to make financial payments for violating the terms of the contract to provide a soundproof system that included a soundproof ceiling and a soundproof floor. Suzan is entitled to be paid a sum of money which is equal to the amount necessary to hire someone else to complete that part of the contract and to make the whole system to be soundproof. Here it does not matter whether the cost of completion is expensive compared to the portion of the contract that was underperformed by company A in collaboration with company B. There are different types of monetary damages that Suzan is entitled from company A. They include compensatory damages and punitive damages (Malik, Muhammad & Naveed, 67). Compensatory damages are those damages that are meant to cover the losses incurred by Suzan because of the breach of contract by company A. The breaching party will have to pay an amount which replaces the actual loss incurred by the other party. Also, the court can allow company A to pay Suzan punitive damages as an experience to help or to deter the company from committing similar acts to other people in the future. Under compensatory damages, Susan is entitled to specific damages and not general damage.  Specific damages here are remedies to cover any loss which incurred in the because of exceptional circumstances and conditions which the breaching contract that is company A knew about initially when the contract was being made.

Another remedy that Suzann is entitled to be the specific performance. Company A and Company B need to get involved in paying valuable items when money damages are not adequate to compensate for Susan’s property. The company may be forced to giving useful things like a new set of ceiling board. This is because soundproof ceiling boards are always far much expensive than the standard ceiling boards. The legal system is entitled to force the company to buy a new set of ceiling boards and materials to make the floor because company A was not serious with finding a qualified company to work with rather than working with company B (Malik, Muhammad & Naveed, 77).  This will instil discipline in the company.

Suzan is also entitled to a remedy of restitution is a remedy which is used to restore the injured party to the position occupied before the contract. This remedy will allow company A to pay money Susan for the loss of profits or not earning income due to breach of the contract (Malik, Muhammad & Naveed, 87). During the period when Susan will be hiring the civil Engineering company C, her business will be at a standstill in that it will not be making any profit. Susan is therefore required to calculate all the benefits she would have made during that sound reproofing season and present it to company A.

Question 2 a. Analyze Whether Joseph can Recover his Losses from Company A and Company B

From torts law, Joseph is definitely to recover his losses from both Company A and company B. This is because both the two companies have their members violated special and fundamental rules and regulations that would have ensured Joseph total safety in his life. Under touts law, violations of safety rules are always taken with a lot of seriousness and measures are ever assumed to make sure that compensations are made (Deakin, Simon & Basil, 58). It covers violations where the company’s facilities or an employee of the company causes injury or suffering to another person. The laws serve two purposes that are to compensate the victim of any losses caused by the defendant and also to discourage the defendant from repeating the same thing in the future.

To begin with, in as much as Joseph was over speeding company A, a private sports club, still has made a mistake that makes it a subject to paying Joseph. This is a mistake not repairing the cycling path. A private sports club needs to make sure that it fulfils all the requirements required for its operation and the requirements include having a well-maintained bike path. The remedy for a destroyed bike path is never limiting the speed of bike riders but instead repairing the path to make it suitable and comfortable for the bike riders to enjoy their rides. A private sports club is always entitled to a lot of profit margins that can make it well manage the whole system through repairs (Deakin, Simon & Basil, 55). According to torts law, the company, in this case, needs to be subjected to paying Joseph specifically to discourage its officials from running a sports club with a lot of defectives and a lot of poor infrastructures. This will serve as an example in the future generations and the future leaders who will come over to take the leadership of the company that it is essential to make sure that the company has its facilities meeting the required standards and never to run under quality facilities.

Also, property management company, company B, needs to pay Joseph or Joseph needs to recover his losses from Company B. According to Torts law, it will serve as a punishment for company B. This is because the employees of the company are engaging in illegal practices of allowing people in the sports club and yet they know very well that their permit or membership had already expired. This is an unlawful practice for any company to go against what has already been documented that after such and such a period, one’s membership is expired. No one should use the back door to get in the sports club or because they are known to their friends or family members to be allowed in the cycling path. Allowing Joseph to be compensated by the property management company will set a proper example for all other employees not to take any bribe or any additional given opportunity to allow people in against the law. It will also provide the company with a chance to serve its customers without any form of discrimination by standing by the statutes always no matter what the situation or what the circumstance. The company will also awaken and get challenged to improve the quality of services its employees are offering to customers by tracking their movement and making sure that they are complying with all the set standards of the company. This, in turn, will have a positive impact on the overall growth of the profit margins of both the sports club and the property management company, company B. So, the essence of the reasons as to why Joseph can recover his losses from the companies, company A, and company B, is basically to discourage the companies from misbehaving in whatever they are doing and sort of instiling discipline to ensure that they perform well in future. Instilling of this discipline can be achieved by helping Joseph to recover his losses and this will avoid unprofitable punishments (Deakin, Simon & Basil, 55). This will allow the companies to provide high-quality services to their customers and also prevent or minimize future accidents that might arise from the same negligence.

Question 2b. Analyze Whether Company A can Refuse to pay Company B any Fee Until Company B Could Finish the Whole Design of The Television

Company A can well refuse to pay company B any fee until it finishes the whole design of the television because the contract indicates that the payment will be made at the end of the work. The purpose of the work in this essence would mean that the new smart television will have all the required features that company A specified. They include a sound control function for searching television programs and movies (Poppo, Laura & Zheng, 65-67).  Paying any amount to company B, the electrical manufacturing company will be like going against the contractor breaching the agreement which can easily affect the relationship of the two companies especially even at the end of the work the smart television does not turn out to be what was expected.

There is also no need for Company A to pay company B, before the end of the work because the fact that they have failed to deliver high-quality work does not give company A an assurance that they will be able to provide high-quality work. The reason for the delay most probably is because they are experiencing problems in meeting the standards and specifications that the seller gave them. Maybe the specs are too high for their capabilities and their abilities so paying them will only make them do shabby work which at the end of the day will end up destroying the reputation of Company A because of a provision or supplying sub-standard products (Poppo, Laura & Zheng, 67). Denying them the payment will make them work harder and go an extra mile of providing high-quality work because they understand that they have already done the better part of the job and no one would want to allow all that energy, money and efforts go to waste. Everyone under such a circumstance would push to make sure that everything works correctly and that the requirements and specifications given are met.

Company A should also not pay company B as a form of punishment for late deliveries. It is always required that any order given to any company will be completed within the stipulated time. This will help to avoid all the inconveniences that can be caused by the delay like, for instance, the reassigning of the order by Company A’s client. Sometimes it happens that the client becomes impatient with the supplier of the products and sometimes fail to understand the reason for the delay in the delivery of the ordered products. They can quickly get offended and reassign the order to another supplier who might look more serious and more interested in the work. Failing to pay them will act as a form of punishment to discourage them from late deliveries (Poppo, Laura & Zheng, 67).

On the other hand, this will help the company to be very vigilant on time which at the end of the day will increase its reliability and its performance in general. It will prevent the same thing, that is a delay in deliveries from happening to the other people in the future and this will be a good gesture for the company. In other words, failing to pay the company will act as a form of punishment meant to correct the unbecoming behavior of company B.