Lahore University of Management Sciences

Law 220 Contract Law Fall & 2012

Instructor Saad Rasool

Room No.

Office Hours

Email

Telephone

Secretary/TA

TA Office Hours

Course URL (if any)

Course Basics

Credit Hours

Lecture(s) Nbr of Lec(s) Per Week 2 Duration 100 minutes

Recitation/Lab (per week)

Nbr of Lec(s) Per Week Duration

Tutorial (per week)

Nbr of Lec(s) Per Week Duration

Course Distribution

Core Contracts

Elective

Open for Student Category

Close for Student Category

Lahore University of Management Sciences

COURSE DESCRIPTION

This course pack is designed to give students a theoretical and practical understanding of the Law of contract. The course focuses on solving problem questions on contract law and examines fundamental concepts of contracting theory, including offer and acceptance, consideration, misrepresentation, and the breach of contract, as well as the remedies arising from breach of contract.

COURSE PREREQUISITE(S)

NONE

COURSE OBJECTIVES

On completion of the course students will be able to:

Analyze sets of facts presented in the form of problem questions, identify and examine the relevant law and provide answers on the application of the law to the facts.

Present and critically discuss the content of legal rules, answer essay questions on the evolution of the law of contract, and assess the current state of the law.

In order to successfully complete the course, the students need to demonstrate knowledge of the main areas of the course through the presentation of case law and statute, and show skills in answering problem questions in identifying the relevant law and applying it to the facts in reaching a sensible conclusion.

Lahore University of Management Sciences

Learning Outcomes

As a result of attending this course, the Students will learn how to:

Understand the origin and legal reasoning behind the contracting theory.

Understand some of the core doctrines within the common law development of contract law.

Identify the critical elements required to create a legally binding contract enforceable under law.

Understand contract performance, discharge and breach.

Recognize the different situations which may lead to early contract termination, such as frustration, repudiation and rescission.

Recognize the differing remedies that may apply in the event of a breach of contract. Grading Breakup and Policy

Assignment(s): NA Home Work: NA Quiz(s): 10 Class Participation: 15 Attendance: 10 Midterm Examination: 25 Project: NA Final Examination: 40

Examination Detail

Midterm Exam

Yes/No: Yes Combine Separate: Separate Duration: Preferred Date: Exam Specifications: Factual problem solving and legal reasoning

Lahore University of Management Sciences

Final Exam

Yes/No: Yes Combine Separate: Combine Duration: Exam Specifications:

Textbook(s)/Supplementary Readings

Compulsory readings: Ewan McKendrick, Contract Law 9th Edition (Palgrave Macmillan, 2011) The Contract Act, 1872 (Bare Act)

Supplementary Readings: Buttler M. Mahmood, The Contract Act, 1972 Second Edition (Pakistan Law Times Publications 2011)

COURSE OVERVIEW

Week/ Lecture/ Module

Topics Recommended

Readings Case Law (Conceptual) Case Law (Pakistani/Indian)

Module 1 CONTRACT THEORY

Brian H. Bix, Theories of Contract Law and Enforcing Promissory

Morality: Comments on Charles Fried, Contract Law (Cambridge,

2012)

Liam Murphy, Contract and Promise

Brian H. Bix, Some Reflections on Contract Law Theory, Contract

Law (Cambridge, 2012)

Module 1

Introduction

i. Offer/Proposal

ii. Bilateral Contracts

iii. Unilateral Contracts

iv. Public at Large

McKendrick, Chapter 3: Offer and acceptance up to 3.4 pp. 2735

Butler, Chapter 3: Agreement 3.1 Introduction, 3.2 Understanding the concept of offer, pp. 31-35.

Contract Act 1872, section(s) 2(a), 2(c), 2(e) and 9.

United Dominions Trust (Commercial) Ltd v Eagle

Aircraft Service Ltd (1968)

Gibson v. Manchester City Council (1979)

Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Company (1893)

AIR 1957 S.C. 95

LR 38 IA 80

AIR 1949 Nag. 286

ILR 28 Bom. 66

Module 1

Offer/Proposal

i. What is not an Offer/Proposal?

ii. Intention is Important

iii. Conditional Proposal

McKendrick, Chapter 3: Offer and acceptance up to 3.7

Acceptance and 3.9 Acceptance in ignorance of the offer, pp.

2735 and 36-37.

Butler, Chapter 3: Agreement 3.1 Introduction, 3.3 What is

Gibson v. Manchester City Council (1979)

Pharmaceutical Society v. Boots (1953)

Fisher v. Bell (1961)

Partridge v. Crittenden (1968)

Lahore University of Management Sciences

iv. Invitation to Treat

1. Advertisements

2. Newspaper Ads

3. Display of Goods

4. Auctions/Tenders

v. Communication of Offer

not an offer to 3.4.3 Tendering and 3.5 Communication of an

offer, pp. 31-32, 35-44 and 49-50.

Contract Act 1872, section(s) 2(a), 2(c), 2(f), 3, 4, 8 and 9.

Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Company (1893)

Harvela Investments Ltd v. Royal Trust Co of

Canada Ltd (1985)

Blackpool and Fylde Aero Club Ltd v. Blackpool

Borough Council (1990)

Gibbons v. Proctor (1891)

R v. Clark (1927)

Module 1

Acceptance

i. Acceptance

1. By Word or by Conduct

2. Counter Offer

3. Request for more Information

4. Battle of Forms

ii. Communication of Acceptance

1. In Bilateral contracts

2. In Unilateral contracts

iii. Exceptions to need of communication

1. Where requirement of

communication is waived by the

offeror

2. Postal Acceptance

3. Modern Technology

iv. Method of Acceptance

1. Specific method

2. Inferred from the Offer

v. End of an unaccepted offer

1. Change of mind

2. If conditions in the offer is not

fulfilled

3. Death of the offeror or offeree

4. Lapse of Offer

McKendrick, Chapter 3: Offer and acceptance 3.7

Acceptance, 3.8 Communication of the acceptance and 3.10

Prescribed method of acceptance to 3.14 Termination of the

offer, pp: 35, 35-36 and 37-44.

Butler, Chapter 3: Agreement 3.6 Termination of an offer to

3.12 Contract formation: Time and Place, pp. 50-76.

Contract Act 1872, section(s) 2(b), 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35

and 36.

Brogden v. Metropolitan Railway Company

(1871)

Day Morris Associates v. Voyce (2003)

Hyde v. Wrench (1840)

Butler Machine Tool v. Ex-Cell-o (1979)

Felthouse v. Bindley (1862)

Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Company (1893)

Adams v. Lindsell (1818)

Entores v. Miles Far East Corp (1955)

Manchester Diocesan Council for Education v.

Commercial and General Investments (1970)

Quenerduaine v. Cole (1883)

Routledge v. Grant (1828)

Dickinson v. Dodds (1876)

Financings Ltd v. Stimson (1962)

Bradbury v. Morgan (1862)

Offord v. Davies (1862)

2007 CLC 462

1995 MLD 123

AIR 1938 Lah. 341

AIR 1970 S.C 706

AIR 1957 SC 95

2005 YLR 301

2002 YLR 1061

AIR 1955 S.C 468

1996 CLC 698

PLD 1999 Kar. 181

2003 MLD 131

AIR 1960 Pat 139

AIR 1962 SC 378

AIR 1947 Mad. 366

PLD 1965 Kar. 202

2004 YLR 1612

2008 CLD 356

2008 MLD 577

1988 CLC 448

PLD 1972 Lah. 847

1972 Cur LJ 408 (Punj)

AIR 1949 Pat 270

1972 Madh Pra 131

Lahore University of Management Sciences

AIR 1991 Pat. 14

Module 1

Consideration

i. Definition

ii. Consideration must be sufficient but

need not to be adequate

1. Economic Value

iii. Existing obligations as good

consideration

1. Obligations which arise under the

Law, independently of any contract

2. Obligations which are owed under a

contract with a third party

3. Obligations which exist under a

contract with a person who has

made a new promise, for which the

existing obligation is alleged to

provide good consideration

iv. Past Consideration

McKendrick, Chapter 5: Consideration and form 5.2

Consideration defined to 5.8 Intangible returns and 5.10

Performance of duty imposed by law to 5.18 Past

consideration, pg. 63-75 and 75-87.

Butler, Chapter 6: Consideration 6.1 Introduction to 6.5

Consideration: specific examples, pp. 136-170

Contract Act 1872, section(s) 2(d), 2(f), 23 and 24.

Articles:

Mindy Chen-Wishart, Consideration, practical benefit and the Emperors new clothes, Beatson, J. and D. Friedmann, (eds) Good faith and fault in contract law.

Currie v. Misa (1875)

Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v. Selfridge & Co

Ltd (1915)

Thomas v. Thomas (1842)

Chappell v. Nestle (1960)

White v. Bluett (1853)

Ward v. Byham (1956)

Glasbrook Bros Ltd v Glamorgan CC (1925)

Stilk v. Myrick (1809)

Williams v. Roffey Bros & Nicholls (Contractors)

Ltd (1991)

Shadwell v. Shadwell (1860)