Reference no: EM133638295

Assignment:

Problem 1 Brock owns an antique store. He receives a telephone call from Siri who is looking for "Picatto" cranberry glass pieces to add to her collection. Brock advised her that he had six Picatto cranberry serving dishes in stock and could obtain others from an antique wholesaler if required. After describing the pieces to Siri over the phone, she agreed to purchase them for $1,200.00. Brock shipped the glass to Siri. When it arrived she refused to accept the delivery telling the courier to return them to Brock. She claims that the pieces are of a darker color than she had anticipated and do not match her existing collection and that two of the pieces are cracked. Brock comes to you for advice. He claims that all of the pieces were in perfect condition when they were shipped and considered the pieces to belong to Siri as soon as they were shipped and left his premises.

Required: Explain the remedies, if any, to which Brock is entitled. Does Siri have any legal basis for refusing to accept the goods? How does "caveat emptor" and the provisions of the Sale of Goods Act apply?

Problem 2 Marco, Erica and Katharine have established separate advertising businesses. Marco and Erica operate as sole proprietorships. Katharine has incorporated a company, Katco Inc. to run her business. Katharine was recently the successful bidder for the production of an advertising campaign for Mickey Best's Beer ("MBB"), a brewery started by sports legend Mickey Best. Since she did not have the resources to complete the campaign, she suggested to Marco and Erica that they complete the job together. Marco, Erica and Katharine agreed that although the contract, as signed, was with Katco Inc., they would all contribute equal amounts of capital, staff and time and divide the profits equally, subject to a commission fee of $100,000.00 which would be payable to Katco Inc. for arranging the contract. The campaign was successful with each of the parties earning $200,000.00. On January 1, MBB told Katco Inc. that they would not be renewing the contract.

In response to her inquiries MBB revealed that it has signed an agreement with Marco's Marketing Ltd. ("MML"), a corporation recently formed by Marco, for advertising services for the next year at a price of $300,000.00. Erica and Katharine come to you for advice and want to commence legal action against MLL and Marco for all profits, and/or an injunction to prohibit MML from proceeding with the contract. They feel that a partnership arrangement had been entered into by the parties. Marco claims that since MML is a new corporation, any past dealings which Marco may have had do not apply to MLL and in any event that they were never partners and therefore all clients were "up for grabs".

Required: Advise Erica and Katharine whether they have any basis to commence an action against MML or Marco. Be certain to explain the applicable principles as part of your answer.