L Estrange Vs Graucob Case Study

INTRODUCTION

A contract is a binding legal agreement enforceable in the court of law. However, this is not true for every agreement between two person.

A legally binding agreement means there must be a form of compliance between the two parties.However, not every agreement are contracts as not every compliance is legally enforceable.Only when the courts states that the agreement is a contract, is it then legally enforceable.

Mr Jones had entered an exemption clause contract. A clause may be included into a contract which target is to not include or confine someone’s liability for breach of contract. However, the person may only depend on such a clause if it has been included into the contract, and if this were to be an form of understanding,

The machine did not work. She sued for breach of an implied warranty that the goods were fit for purpose. The Plaintiff did not know that the contract contained this exclusion clause – it was, the Court noted, ‘in regrettably small print but quite legible’. When the document is signed it is immaterial that a party has not read it and does not know if its contents. He is bound unless there has been fraud or misrepresentation. As there was no fraud or misrepresentation here the Plaintiff was bound by the exclusion

This statement is what led Mr Jones to enter the Fraudulent Misrepresentation contract, which occurs when a party makes a misrepresentation with intent to trick other party while knowing that it is untrue, deliberately making a false statement.

Hence, Mr Jones can appeal at the Court Of Appeal and even claim that he had signed the contract under “fraudulent misrepresentation” in order to escape from the contract.

“When a document containing contractual terms is signed, then, in the absence of fraud, or - misrepresentation, the party signing it is bound, and it is wholly immaterial whether he has read the document or not.‟

Due to the presence of misrepresentation, Mr Smith could not rely on the exemption clause stating he bears no responsibilities to the income generated as he gave a statement which states that the annual income is $900,000 which is not true. Mr Jones would be able to file a Court Of Appeal against him/the contract for what he