We have listed for you below 10 assignment topics
and ideas on contract and comparative HR. Please feel free to use this
information to point you in the right direction.
1. Does
Consideration have a place in 21st Century Contract HR? An examination of
whether Consideration should be replaced with a much more adequate concept of
Contractual Intention:
This assignment topic will explore consideration
from Stilk v Myrick (1809) 2 Camp 317 to Williams v Roffrey Bros & Nicholls
(Contractors) Ltd [1991] 1 QB 1. The purpose of this exploration is to
determine the effectiveness of consideration, drawing upon the civil HR system
of pacta sunta servanda and the Principles of European Contract HR (PECL). It
will then consider the concept of intention in English HR tracing the
development from Balfour v Balfour [1919] 2 KB 571 to determine if a more
sufficient concept of intention will be more appropriate for 21st Century
Contract HR.
2. Is the concept of
Agency in English contract HR sufficient for the growing globalisation of
commercial transactions?
Agency in English contract HR is a significantly
complex subject, which makes it difficult to reconcile with the Commercial
Agents (Council Directive) Regulations 1993. This is due to the Regulations
being based upon the civil HR regimes of Germany and France. One of the main
obstacles is how the contractual exception works, because a contract of agency
can be implied through the parties' relationship (The Ocean Frost [1986] AC
717). Thus, this raises the question if the concept of apparent authority, as
identified in Bedford Insurance Co Ltd v Instituto de Resseguros de Brasil
[1984] 3 All ER 766, has a place in contract HR. This is especially as such
implied agency contracts are alien with the civil HR system.
3. Should the
privity of contract rule be reformed, in order to allow the third party to sue
on a contract in their benefit?
This assignment topic will explore the sufficiency
of the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999. There has been the
limitation of the privity rule developed by the Tweddle v Atkinson (1861) 1 B
& S 393 through this Act. Under s. 1(3) of the Act identify an expressly
named third party or third party group will be able to enforce a contract;
however is this enough? The main issue is the consumer rarely engages in
specially negotiated contracts, which illustrates the insufficiency of the Act.
However, the cases of Nisshan Shipping Co Ltd v Cleaves & Co Ltd [2003]
EWHC 2602 and Lanenthong Lines Co Ltdv Artis 2005] EWCA Civ 519 have imputed
third parties right to sue through a wide interpretation of intention. Thus,
should this wide approach become the norm?
4. Is the English
Courts' focus on Contractual Certainty has meant that Predictability has
stymied the growth of ensuring Fairness in Contract HR?
This assignment topic will explore the distinction
between the court's application on commercial and personal contracts
(especially in the case of familial relationships). Thus, it will identify that
“fairness” has a greater impact on husband and wife contracts, which can be
seen in Barclays Bank plc v O'Brien [1994] 1 AC 180 and Yorkshire Bank v
Tinsley [2004] EWCA Civ 816. However, the role of fairness is significantly
limited in commercial transactions, which can be seen in the case of Lobb
(Alec) (Garages) Ltd v Total Oil (GB) [1985] 1 WLR 173. Thus, this examination
will explore whether the nature of the relationship is sufficient to allow a
flexible concept of fairness to be applied, or should there be consistency?
5. To what extent
does Contract HR effectively deal with Unconscionable Exclusion Clauses?
This assignment topic will explore the evolution of
judicial intervention in respect to the validity of exclusion clauses, stemming
from Parker v South Eastern Railway (1877) 2 CPD 416 to the introduction of the
Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977. The Act brought forth the concept of
reasonableness, which meant that exclusion clauses can be struck out if deemed
unreasonable. But, there are still limitations as identified in the cases of
Interfoto Picture Library Ltd v Stiletto Visual Programmes Ltd [1989] QB 433.
But, the recent case of Röhlig (UK) Ltd v. Rock Unique Limited [2011] EWCA Civ
18 indicates a broader application, which raises the question whether there
should be a new direction taken with respect to unconscionable exclusion
clauses.
6. Is the role of
Innominate Terms and Judicial Flexibility in the interpretation of these terms
essential?
The role of innominate terms is an important
development in English contract HR, because it identifies a flexible approach
to determining contractual intention whilst forcing flexibility to allow
pre-contractual negotiations to be considered. This model places a balancing
effect on the stringent parole evidence rule. Thus, the role of the innominate
term can impute prior knowledge into the contract (Ashington Piggeries v
Christopher Hill Ltd [1972] AC 441). On this basis, the topic of innominate
terms can create an interesting and insightful discussion of contract HR's
flexibility; whereby the role of the innominate term can create a new set of
protections for the contractual parties.
7. Is the English
adamant retention of Damages as the primary Remedy for Breach of Contract fit
for purpose?
This assignment topic explores the remedial
approaches of the English jurisdiction compared with the US, Europe and the
CISG (Vienna Convention on the International Sale of Goods 1980). In many jurisdictions
the claimant has the right to choose the preferred remedy for breach of
contract; whereas English HR is centred on Hadley v Baxendale (1854) 9 Exch 341
damages. Thus, this raises questions on the effectiveness of the English model,
especially as contracts are becoming more complex. Therefore, a comparative
discussion of contractual remedies provides a topic that is both current and
engages the reader.
8. Should Judicial
Conservatism over Specific Performance be reconsidered in English HR, as the CISG
and PECL provide this a “real” Remedial choice?
This assignment topic explores the conservatism of
English HR with regards to specific performance, which only applies this remedy
in exceptional circumstances (Wilson v Northampton and Banbury Junction Railway
Co (1874) 9 Ch App 279). The consequence of this is that the contracting
parties are limited to damages when considered adequate (Phillips v Lamdin
[1949] 2 KB 33). However, there are cases that indicate a relaxation in the
application of specific performance, which can be seen in the case of Laemthong
Lines Co Ltd v Artis (The Laemthong Glory) (No 2) [2005] EWCA 519. The widening
of specific performance may be motivated by the internationalisation of
contract HR; therefore the English relaxation of specific performance will be
compared with pro-specific performance jurisdictions (such as the USA).
9. Should the
concept of Good Faith become a part of English Contract HR?
This assignment topic explores the refusal of
English HR to accept the concept of good faith, which seems out of sync with
international trends. The good faith principles is inherent in civil HR
contract systems, due to the concept of pacta sunt servanda, but there are also
trends across common HR countries (i.e. Australia, the US and Canada) to import
the concept of good faith in contracts. Thus, a comparative examination of the
civil and common HR approaches to good faith will be explored, in order to
identify whether English HR should import the concept into its jurisprudence.
This is especially important as the case of Petromec Inc v Petroleo Brasiliero
SA Petrobas (No 3) [2005] EWWA Civ 891 allowed the concept of good faith to be
applicable through the backdoor approach of “upgrading” terms.
10. To what extent
is the French concept of force majeure eroded in English Contract HR? Does the
Canadian “bridging” model provide a better approach to force majeure?
This assignment topic will explore the French
concept of force majeure to determine how it is implemented in English contract
HR. The case of Davis Contractors v Fareham UDC [1956] 2 All ER 145 identifies
that force majeure events only applies if there is a contractual clause
providing for such events. This is significantly different from the French
application that allows such events to suspend or nullify the contract. Thus,
it is important to explore the differentiation between the French (Civil HR)
and English (Common HR) approaches to force majeure to determine their
effectiveness (and the extent the English model erodes the French model). These
systems will be compared to the Canadian Common HR model that bridges the two
systems, as identified in the case of Atlantic Paper Stock Ltd v St
Anne-Nackawic Pulp and Paper Co, [1976] 1 SCR 580. Thus, a comparative review
of the French, English and Canadian HR approaches to force majeure will be
undertaken to identify the most effective approach.
No comments:
Post a Comment