Question

(2) On one day a man who claimed to be Dr. Bun, of NoTrue WallPaper Ltd., the expert wallpaper, persuaded Harry to buy the wallpaper for interior decoration. Harry bought 100 rolls wallpaper for HK$50,000 for Susan's apartment. He signed a written contract without bothering to read it. The contract said that NoTrue WallPaper Ltd. would have no liability for any defect in the wallpaper. When Harry used the wallpaper, they are wet and cannot put onto the wall. Harry goes back to NoTrue WallPaper Ltd., but it is already shut down. Harry immediately reported to the police and Consumer Council, but he was told that the man who had sold wallpaper to Harry was a rogue pretending to be Dr. Bun. Advice Harry of his legal position.

(3) Harry completes the first stage of the contracted design work. In reliance on the agreed design, Susan is planning to purchase a European L-shaped sofa made in Spain from iFurniture, a furniture company, for HK$25,000. Susan just see the sofa set from iFurniture's catalogue, she says that she would very much like to view the real sofa but that she is out of town on a five-day business trip and will not be able to view it until she returns. The boss of iFurniture, Lucas says that if another buyer comes forward, he will have to sell the sofa to that buyer. Susan says she will pay HK$2,500 if iFurniture promises not to sell the sofa to another buyer for the next five days. Lucas agrees to this. Analyse whether any contract has been made between the parties and, if so, what are its terms? Refer to the relevant case law to support your answer.

(4) Harry completes the contracted design work, but Susan only pays HKS300,000, instead of the HKS500,000 originally agreed. Advise Harry of his legal position.

Answer 1

2) As Harry has entered the contract with Dr bun of Notrue wallpaper ltd, which stands true in the eyes of law. How ever as stated in the question that the Dr bun is pretending from Notrue Wallpaper Ltd.and is false person entered into contract with by giving wrong perception.

This fact of the case does not denies the situation that Both parties has enterd into a written contract which specifically says that any defect in the wallpaper will not held responsible to Dr bun, even though without considering it Mr Harry eneterd into the contract and founf wallpaper Roll wet that is defective. In that situtaion Mr Harry cannot held responsible to the Dr bun for giving Wet wallpaper as contract specifically states that he can be held responsible for defective wallpaper. Hence Mr harry cannot held any position against MR Bun in the consumer courts. His case if of self negligence on his part for which Dr bun cannot held responsible.

3) As per the fact of the case as Susan wants to buy the real sofa from ifurniture that she chooses from catalouge of ifurniture and also stopped for sell to any other parties on the payment of the extra HK$2500 extra apart from the cost of the sofa.However the question does not states that these terms have mutually agreed has any written impact and countersigned by both the parties hence accornding to the contract act thier must be written contract between the parties to held responsible both of them and enforceable in the eyes of law in case of non fullfilling its terms.Accordingly no contract has been entered into and lucas any further action which either in favour or not to Ms Susan will not held liable for any legal proceeding to Mr Lucas.

4)As stated in the question that total value of contract enterd into between Ms susan and Mr Harry is of HK$5,00,000 and legally held true in the eyes of the law. However Ms susan only pays 3,00,000HK$ to Mr. Hrry which is 2,00,000 HK$ less than the amount of actual contract accordingly Mr harry has complete right to ask his remaining payment of 2,00,000 HK$ and upon non payment by Ms susan he can legally all the rights sue her in the Consumer courts and further in Civil Courts.