Q1. Explain the below given case study belongs to which category the offer belongs to? Stilk v Myrick (1809) The claimant signed a contract, agreeing to be a sailor on a ship for wages of 5 a month. The ship had a crew of only eleven men. When two of the crew deserted, the captain promised the remaining nine that if they continued with the voyage, as they had originally agreed to do, they could have the wages of the two deserters shared amongst them. The claimant and the other eight remaining crew agreed to this and completed the voyage. However, the captain refused to pay any more than the 5 a month originally agreed. The claimant sued for his share of the extra money which had been promised.

Q2. Examine the below given case study give the solution and comments. Williams v Roffey Bros Ltd (1990) (Court of Appeal) The defendants had contracted to refurbish a block of flats. They subcontracted the carpentry work to the claimant, who was to be paid 20,000 for doing the carpentry on 27 flats. Soon after starting work, the claimant realized that he had priced the job too low. He told the defendants that he would not be able to afford to finish the job if he were not paid more. If all the work on the flats was not finished on time the defendants would have become liable to pay huge damages to the owner of the block of flats. The defendants were so concerned about this that they agreed to pay the claimant an extra 575 per flat if he carried on and did the carpentry work as originally agreed. Happy with this agreement, the claimant carried on with the work. The claimant was not paid the extra money which he had been promised and so he sued for breach of contract.

Q3. Examine the below given case study give the solution and comments. Re Moore & Co and Landauer & Co (1921) (Court of Appeal( A consignment of 3,100 tins of peaches was sold. The goods were to be shipped from Australia to a buyer in London. The buyer rejected the consignment on the grounds that whereas the peaches had been described as packed 30 tins to a case, about half of the tins were packed 24 to a case instead of 30. The correct number of tins were delivered.

Q4. Examine the below given case study give the solution and comments. Under wvood Ltdv Burgh Castle Brick and Cement Syndicate (1922) (Court of Appeal(On 20 February a 30-ton engine was sold. The contract obliged the seller to detach the engine from a concrete casing and to put it on a train. (This would take over two weeks.) While the engine was being loaded on the train it became damaged.

Q5. Examine the below given case study give the solution and comments. Bent leyv Craven (1853) Bentley and Craven were in partnership together in a firm which bought and sold sugar. Craven was the firm's buyer and on account of his business skill was occasionally able to buy sugar at a greatly reduced price. On one occasion he was offered a consignment of sugar at well below the wholesale price. He bought this sugar himself and then sold it to the firm at the going wholesale rate.

Q6. Examine the below given case study give the solution and comments. Marie walling Vs. Harry Johnson and Realty Company This appeal concerns to action to recover the value of two diamond rings owned by plaintiff. They were delivered and accepted for safe keeping by the commodore Hotel, operated by defendant partnership and were subsequently taken from the hotel safe by robbery. Plaintiff had occupied an apartment in the hotel for some years. On July 9 ,1960, having been confined in a hospital with a broken leg she directed her son to take two rings from her apartment and deposit them with the hotel clerk for safe keeping.in accordance with customary practice in performing this service, the rings were exhibited to the clerk and placed in a sealed "safety deposit envelop" Used by the hotel for depositing valuables belongings to guests. A numbered stub attached to the envelope was signed by the clerk and plaintiff's son. And a "depositor's check" containing the same number was detached from the signed stub and given to him. This depositor's check was to present when the envelope and contents were called for at which time the depositor was required to sign it so the signature could be compared.