Question

BOOK - CONTEMPORARY CANADIAN BUSINESS LAW

Chapter 14 - Breach of Contract and Remedies, Page 260, Case 3

Trebic was a skilled cabinetmaker of European ancestry. Moldeva, who had emigrated to Canada from the same country, requested him to build a set of kitchen cupboards “in the old-country style.” The two men discussed the general appearance desired, then Trebic drew up a list of materials that he required to construct the cupboards. Moldeva obtained the necessary lumber and supplies for Trebic, then took his family on a vacation. On his return, Moldeva found the work completed, and admired the craftsmanship and design that Trebic had exhibited in the making of the cabinets. Trebic had carefully carved the “old-country designs” on the trim boards. He had skillfully constructed the drawers and cabinets using wooden dowels, rather than nails, again in accordance with “old-country” tradition. In the execution of this skill he had used only hand tools, and then only the tools used by “old-country” craftsmen in the cabinet-making trade. In every detail, the cabinets were “old-country style.” When Moldeva indicated that he was completely satisfied with the cabinets, Trebic submitted his account in the amount of $4,800. The sum represented 120 hours work at $40 per hour, the normal rate charged by skilled cabinetmakers in the area. Moldeva, who was a building contractor himself, objected to the amount of Trebic’s account. He stated that carpenters in his shop could manufacture kitchen cabinets of the general size and shape of those made by Trebic in only a few days’ time. He offered Trebic $800 as payment in full. Trebic refused to accept the $800 offer and brought an action against Moldeva on the $4,800 account. Discuss the possible arguments of the parties. Render a decision.

Answer 1

Based on the above case facts, Trebic has a legal right to demand the $ 4,800 amount for his services, and Moldeva is legally liable for paying the amount to Trebic.

Explanation:

According to contract law, when the behavior of parties reveal they had a mutual intent to form a valid contract, and their conduct reveal elements of a valid contracts rather than expressing the elements, then the parties have formed a valid and enforceable implied-in fact contract.

Certainly, based on the above case, Moldeva requested for the services of Trebic: a professional cabinetmaker of European ancestry (offer). Moreover, Moldeva gave specific details on how he wanted his cabinets be made (terms of the offer). Trebic made the cabinets based on the details such that Moldeva was impressed with his work (acceptance and mutuality). For this reason, Trebic presented the bill worth $ 4,800(consideration) to Moldeva based on market price for his services.

Therefore, based on the above situation, the Moldeva and Trebic conduct reveal they had a mutual intent to form a valid contract. Secondly, their behavior reveal valid elements of a contract established by contract law. Therefore, it is reasonable to state that the parties formed a valid and enforceable implied in fact contract. This means Moldeva is liable for paying the amount Trebic requested, and Trebic has a legal right to demand the amount since it represent a fair market price for his services.

****Please please please LIKE THIS ANSWER, so that I can get a small benefit, Please****