Jump to content

Australian Survivor!! Now - Tribal!! Final!! Congratulations to our Sole Survivor - Outpost31!!


Recommended Posts

Greg enters in to a contract with a tie silk company to buy a load of tie silks, but repudiates the contract soon after. The company then still imports the silks, sells them at auction cheaper than what they would've been paid by Greg. They go after Greg for repudiation of the contract and claim the difference between the auction takings and what they would've got from him. Do they get it?

both tribes said no both are correct.

Greg's ship is taking a huge shipment of cattle pellets, and part of the contract is that shipping be made in good condition. The shipment of the feed was damaged on the way and the market value of it fell from $100K to $86K. The buyers of the feed rejected the entire shipment on this basis. Can they use this to terminate the entire contract?

both tribes say no both are correct.

Greg jumps in to a stranger's car, rolling down a hill, to stop it from plowing in to a series of other cars. He swerves it in to the water and is sued for property damage. He claims that it was necessity he was to jump in and swerve it as he saved more cars by damaging just this one. How successful is this defense?

both tribes say it works both are correct.

Greg works as a manager for a video store. He works on the later shift and leaves work at 9pm, going to the unlit carpark to his car. While he is on his way to the car he is jumped and assaulted and then sues the shopping centre for negligence for not lighting up the carpark, saying it would prevent this. Who wins?

both say that the centre wins and both are correct - the law is reluctant to impose liability for criminal acts of a third party.

Greg works as a security guard at a hotel. In escort of a man off the premises he headbutts him viciously and causes great injury. In claims for the personal injury the man sues Greg, the hotel and the security company. Determine question of the liability of all three parties.

both say that greg is, the company is, the hotel is not.

greg is not (employees liability act says employees are not liable for torts their employer is also liable for unless serious and wilful misconduct, which is a huge standard as per the case law), the company is, the hotel is not

WE TIE AT 4++.

GREG LIVES TO LITIGATE FOR ANOTHER DAY

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...