Question 1

How are the words and conduct of a contracting party generally assessed?

Accepted Answer

A)  By reference to a reasonable person in that party's own position 
B)  By reference to a reasonable person in the addressee's position 
C)  By reference to a reasonable person who is entirely detached from the proceedings 
D)  None of the options provided is correct. 
A)  By reference to a reasonable person in that party's own position 
B)  By reference to a reasonable person in the addressee's position 
C)  By reference to a reasonable person who is entirely detached from the proceedings 
D)  None of the options provided is correct. B

Question 2

Which of the following reasons are valid justifications for the general adoption of the objective approach in contract law?

Accepted Answer

A)  The objective approach promotes certainty. 
B)  The objective approach allows for a wider range of evidence to be admissible in court. 
C)  Courts are used to applying the objective approach and would be unable to change their approach. 
D)  None of the options provided is correct. 
A)  The objective approach promotes certainty. 
B)  The objective approach allows for a wider range of evidence to be admissible in court. 
C)  Courts are used to applying the objective approach and would be unable to change their approach. 
D)  None of the options provided is correct. A

Question 3

Why was the defendant in Smith v Hughes not liable to pay the contract price for the new oats?

Accepted Answer

A)  Old oats were discussed before the oral contract was concluded. 
B)  Old oats were not discussed but the seller knew that the buyer believed that the oats were in fact old. 
C)  The seller knew that the buyer was contracting for old oats. 
D)  All of the options provided are correct. 
A)  Old oats were discussed before the oral contract was concluded. 
B)  Old oats were not discussed but the seller knew that the buyer believed that the oats were in fact old. 
C)  The seller knew that the buyer was contracting for old oats. 
D)  All of the options provided are correct. D

Question 4

When will 'snapping up' an offer not lead to an enforceable contract?

Accepted Answer

A)  Accepting an offer that was obviously made by mistake 
B)  Accepting an offer made by a consumer 
C)  Accepting an offer that has been individually negotiated. 
D)  None of the options given is correct. 
A)  Accepting an offer that was obviously made by mistake 
B)  Accepting an offer made by a consumer 
C)  Accepting an offer that has been individually negotiated. 
D)  None of the options given is correct.

Question 5

Why did the court in Raffles v Wichelhaus hold that there was no valid contract between the parties?

Accepted Answer

A)  The ambiguity in the contract was the fault of neither party and each party had a different understanding of the agreement. 
B)  The contract failed to satisfy the requirement of formality. 
C)  The conduct of the parties would have led a reasonable person to believe that they did not intend to form a contract. 
D)  None of the options provided is correct. 
A)  The ambiguity in the contract was the fault of neither party and each party had a different understanding of the agreement. 
B)  The contract failed to satisfy the requirement of formality. 
C)  The conduct of the parties would have led a reasonable person to believe that they did not intend to form a contract. 
D)  None of the options provided is correct.

Question 6

A signed contract will only be enforceable if it is established that both parties have actually read and understood its terms.

Accepted Answer

A) True 
 B)False

How are the words and conduct of a contracting party generally assessed?

Which of the following reasons are valid justifications for the general adoption of the objective approach in contract law?

Why was the defendant in Smith v Hughes not liable to pay the contract price for the new oats?

When will 'snapping up' an offer not lead to an enforceable contract?

Why did the court in Raffles v Wichelhaus hold that there was no valid contract between the parties?

A signed contract will only be enforceable if it is established that both parties have actually read and understood its terms.

Formation of Bilateral Contracts

Formation of Unilateral Contracts

Contract As an Agreement

Identity of Offeror and Offeree

Consideration and Promissory Estoppel

Intention to Create Legal Relations

Contracts Requiring Writing

Third Parties

Identifying the Terms of a Contract

Interpretation

Implication

Rectification

The Control of Exclusion Clauses and Unfair Terms

Misrepresentation

Duress

Undue Influence

Unconscionable Bargains and Inequality of Bargaining Power

Good Faith

Capacity

Common Mistake: Contracts Void for Failure of a Basic Contractual Assumption

Frustration: Contracts Discharged for Failure of a Basic Contractual Assumption

Conditions, Warranties, and Innominate Terms

Anticipatory Breach of Contract

Compensatory Damages

Agreed Remedies

Remedies Beyond Compensatory Damages

Filters

Exam 1: Objectivity in Contract Law

How are the words and conduct of a contracting party generally assessed?

Which of the following reasons are valid justifications for the general adoption of the objective approach in contract law?

Why was the defendant in Smith v Hughes not liable to pay the contract price for the new oats?

When will 'snapping up' an offer not lead to an enforceable contract?

Why did the court in Raffles v Wichelhaus hold that there was no valid contract between the parties?

A signed contract will only be enforceable if it is established that both parties have actually read and understood its terms.

Formation of Bilateral Contracts

Formation of Unilateral Contracts

Contract As an Agreement

Identity of Offeror and Offeree

Consideration and Promissory Estoppel

Intention to Create Legal Relations

Contracts Requiring Writing

Third Parties

Identifying the Terms of a Contract

Interpretation

Implication

Rectification

The Control of Exclusion Clauses and Unfair Terms

Misrepresentation

Duress

Undue Influence

Unconscionable Bargains and Inequality of Bargaining Power

Good Faith

Capacity

Common Mistake: Contracts Void for Failure of a Basic Contractual Assumption

Frustration: Contracts Discharged for Failure of a Basic Contractual Assumption

Conditions, Warranties, and Innominate Terms

Anticipatory Breach of Contract

Compensatory Damages

Agreed Remedies

Remedies Beyond Compensatory Damages

Filters