|
Hint
|
Answer
|
|
.
|
x
|
|
2. Express Terms
|
x
|
Express terms are terms ____ agreed upon by the parties. Express terms can take two forms:
• Oral agreements.
• Written agreements.
|
explicitly
|
|
.
|
x
|
|
1a. Distinguishing a Representation from a Term
|
x
|
|
Representations are statements made during precontract negotiations to _____ someone into entering a contract that do not form part of the contract and so thus do not impose legal obligations. Express terms are statements both parties intend to form part of the contract
|
induce
|
|
The courts take a ____ approach. The question is: Would a reasonable person, in the position of the parties, have understood the statement to be a binding term of the contract — or merely a representation?
|
holistic
|
|
a) Time - A statement made closer to the time of entering into the contract is more likely to be considered an express term. If there is a substantial time gap between the statement and the final contract, the courts are less likely to treat the statement as an express term.
|
Routledge v Grant
|
|
b) Importance - When a statement is of significant importance to one party, and the other party knows this, it is more likely to be considered a term of the contract.
|
Couchman v Hill
|
|
c) Oral Statements Followed by Written Contract - When a contract is in writing, it is presumed that all agreed terms are included in the document. Therefore, pre-contractual oral negotiations are typically not considered terms unless explicitly stated in the written agreement.
|
Routledge v McKay
|
|
d) Special Skills of the Statement Maker - If the person making the statement possesses special knowledge or expertise, and the other party relies on this, the courts are more likely to treat the statement as an express term.
|
Dick Bentley v Harold Smith
|
|
.
|
x
|
|
2. Implied Terms
|
x
|
|
Implied terms are terms not explicitly discussed or agreed upon by the parties during negotiations. These terms are automatically inserted into the contract by law, either by courts or ______.
|
statute
|
|
1. Custom - Courts may imply terms if it is common practice in a particular trade or industry for contracts to include these.
|
Hutton v Warren
|
|
2. Business Efficacy - Courts will imply terms when doing so is necessary to make the contract work properly. The question the courts ask is, "Would the contract still function if this term wasn't implied?" If the answer is no, the court will imply the term to ensure the contract makes sense and achieves its purpose.
|
The Moorcock
|
|
3. Officious Bystander - The officious bystander test states that a term can be implied if an outsider had asked the parties during the contract negotiations whether a particular term should be included and both parties would have immediately said, "Of course!"
|
Shirlaw v Southern Foundries
|
4. Reflection of prior dealings - If the parties have engaged in multiple contracts in the past, and those contracts have consistently included certain terms, courts may imply those terms into the current contract.
For example, if a supplier regularly provides goods to a retailer and includes a standard delivery term in each contract, that term may be implied in future contracts, even if not explicitly stated.
|
Spurling v Bradshaw
|
|
Express terms override implied terms by courts.
|
Les Affreteurs Reunis v Walford
|