Chapter 2 Self-test questions

Objectivity in contract law

Quiz Content

not completed
. What justifies the general objective test of intention in contract law?

not completed
. A offers for sale a "working handheld electronic toy, ready to use straight away" at an auction. B places the highest bid. A delivers the electronic toy without batteries. B sues for breach of contract since there are no batteries. What is the likely outcome?

not completed
. A offers to sell B his personalised boomerang for '$50'. Such boomerangs are normally worth $3000. A believes he is giving B a small friendly discount, as he has confused his £s and $s and £1 is worth $50. B knows that A has mixed up his currencies when he made the offer. Nevertheless, B gives A $50. What is the likely outcome?

not completed
. A offers to sell B his personalised boomerang for '$500'. Such boomerangs are normally worth $3000 but A thinks that personalised boomerangs are worth much less. B also makes the same mistake and pays $500 for the boomerang nonetheless. What is the likely outcome?

not completed
. The Grand Express train is transporting two carriages of goods belonging to A. One carriage contains 'ready salted' flavour crisps. The other carriage contains 'cheese and onion' flavour crisps. B contracts with A to buy a carriage load of crisps. The second carriage carrying cheese and onion crisps detaches on the track and does not arrive in time. What is the outcome of the contract?

not completed
. The Grand Express train is transporting two carriages of goods belonging to A. One carriage contains 'ready salted' flavour crisps. The other carriage contains 'cheese and onion' flavour crisps. A offers to sell to B 'a carriage of crisps on the Grand Express train'. B thinks A refers to the 'cheese and onion' carriage and accepts. In fact, A is offering the 'ready salted' crisps. What is the outcome of the contract?

not completed
. In what situations might there be an exception to the rule in L'Estrange v Graucob that a party who signs a written document is bound by it, even if he did not read the terms?

not completed
. A contracts with B for B to be his chauffeur. The terms of the contract are understood to be set out in a document which A had written up. Neither A or B signs the document, but both understand the document to reflect the contract to which they are parties. In what situation may the court decide that the document does not fully represent the contract?

not completed
. What justifies the general objective test of intention in contract law?

not completed
. A offers for sale a "working handheld electronic toy, ready to use straight away" at an auction. B places the highest bid. A delivers the electronic toy without batteries. B sues for breach of contract since there are no batteries. What is the likely outcome?

not completed
. A offers to sell B his personalised boomerang for '$50'. Such boomerangs are normally worth $3000. A believes he is giving B a small friendly discount, as he has confused his £s and $s and £1 is worth $50. B knows that A has mixed up his currencies when he made the offer. Nevertheless, B gives A $50. What is the likely outcome?

not completed
. A offers to sell B his personalised boomerang for '$500'. Such boomerangs are normally worth $3000 but A thinks that personalised boomerangs are worth much less. B also makes the same mistake and pays $500 for the boomerang nonetheless. What is the likely outcome?

not completed
. The Grand Express train is transporting two carriages of goods belonging to A. One carriage contains 'ready salted' flavour crisps. The other carriage contains 'cheese and onion' flavour crisps. B contracts with A to buy a carriage load of crisps. The second carriage carrying cheese and onion crisps detaches on the track and does not arrive in time. What is the outcome of the contract?

not completed
. The Grand Express train is transporting two carriages of goods belonging to A. One carriage contains 'ready salted' flavour crisps. The other carriage contains 'cheese and onion' flavour crisps. A offers to sell to B 'a carriage of crisps on the Grand Express train'. B thinks A refers to the 'cheese and onion' carriage and accepts. In fact, A is offering the 'ready salted' crisps. What is the outcome of the contract?

not completed
. In what situations might there be an exception to the rule in L'Estrange v Graucob that a party who signs a written document is bound by it, even if he did not read the terms?

not completed
. A contracts with B for B to be his chauffeur. The terms of the contract are understood to be set out in a document which A had written up. Neither A or B signs the document, but both understand the document to reflect the contract to which they are parties. In what situation may the court decide that the document does not fully represent the contract?

Back to top