Business law Assignment: Case Analysis of Case of Avinash v Café
Task: Write a report on business law assignment answering the below question using relevant legislations and case laws:
Avinash is a regular visitor to a local café that provides a self-service facility where customers have the option of selecting a drink or food item from a menu displayed on a touch screen located near the counter. To select a product, a customer only has to touch an image or icon showing the desired product, and then touch a virtual ‘OK’ button to submit an order. The order is relayed to the café’s front counter where the cashiers can view it on their own screens.
Customers using the touch screen are immediately issued with a printed ticket containing an order number and the price payable at the front counter.
Customers present these tickets to the cashiers who confirm the relayed order appearing on their screens. At this point, the customers pay for their purchases and await delivery.
This system is designed to save time during peak periods and is very popular. Some customers place their orders as takeaways, while others, like Avinash, prefer to be seated and consume them on the premises. These preferences are preselected by the customers when they use the touch screen.
When Avinash reached the cashier, he paid $4 for the coffee he had ordered and then took a seat waiting for it to be served at his table.
The next morning, Avinash returned and ordered his usual coffee and for the first time is Danish pastry using the self-service facility? The total cost was $7.50 which he duly paid. As he sat in the café consuming his drink, he bit into the pastry and struck something hard, breaking a tooth. He examined the chewed remains and found a piece of metal that had somehow been lodged in the pastry.
Avinash alerted management to this incident and demanded compensation for his anticipated dental repair. The manager expressed regret and directed Avinash to the ticket he had received which on its reverse side, contained a clause stating:
This café accepts no responsibility or liability for any injury caused to customers by consumption of food or drink sold.
In response, Avinash exclaimed, ‘I’m a consumer and I have rights!’
(a) Explain how the contracts Avinash made with the café were formed.
- You will need to address all the essential elements of a contract (including consideration) as well as analyse the legal status of each step or event that led to the café supplying Avinash with its products. Refer to relevant case law. In this part, do not discuss the impact, if any, of consumer protection laws.
- You may, but are not obliged to use the IRAC format for this part, given that each step or event must be analysed separately.
(b) Explain whether the café is legally entitled to rely on the clause printed on the ticket to avoid liability in relation to Avinash’s mishap.
- For the purposes of this part you should consider both common law as well as consumer protection legislation (confirming whether Avinash qualifies as a ‘consumer’).
- Please use IRAC format for this part.
a) Formation of Contract with Avinash
Issues identifies in this part of business law assignment
1. Whether a contract between Avinash and the café was made apart from the contract of each step transactions between both parties.
2. Whether the entire essential should be according to a valid contract definition and the consideration with presenting transactions.
A valid contract has major essential elements such as – Offer, Acceptance, Consideration and intention to develop the legal relationship. A contract requires fulfilling various elements to develop a legal contract.
Offer – the offer made by the café to Avinash must be clear about its terms and condition having no left part of the ambiguity. The offer is the element of binding two parties within the contractual relationship that is considered as an expression statement. Other parties are able to make a valid contract, and the other parties can involve in making negotiation on the terms made by the offeror. In the case of AGC Ltd v McWhirter was taken for the incomplete offer without definite terms, and it was decided to not to be measured as an proposal but only an offer invitation (Daly, 2018).
Acceptance – in this kind of offers a valid contract is essential, and as per it after presenting the offer, the second step should be followed by the acceptance element. Such an offer can be followed under the acceptance only to a person to whom the offer is offered. Acceptance will not develop depending on the offer acceptance that can be performed with the provisions of the offer and in the event of any changes in the conditions but a counter offer. The communication is required clearly to be made between the offeror and the offeree under the acceptance to get a valid contract (Scott, 2018). Example of such kind of case is shown in Hyde v Wrench where the valid acceptance principles were clearly stated.
Consideration – it follows the common law and the contract is based on the law made between the parties where the consideration is required. The price for contract fulfilment is a part of the consideration that is regarded. In this case, the promisor should pay to the promisee. Thus in a case, Chappell & Co. Ltd v Nestle Co Ltd, the unique observation is consideration characteristics. Intention to develop the legal relationship –it is the basic and popular rule of developing a contract where both of the parties have the intention to have a legal relationship in time of agreement development. The legal relationship between the parties is bound to offer acceptance and consideration development. In Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company, the court decided that intention between parties to create the legal relationship should be assessed from a perspective of a sensible individual and in similar place as the plaintiff. The parties in a contract should be intended to bind legally.
The case of Avinash v Café discussed in this section of business law assignment, followed by the common law and the menu was offered by the café on the screen that is considered to be an invitation for the food. The valid acceptance is imposed on placing the order of the customer for the same while the ticket is issued by the machine. The variation of terms was not found when accepting for the same order. The order placed in a café is regarded as the commercial transaction that imposes the intentional presence creating a legal agreement (Howells and Weatherill, 2017). The contract requisite was satisfied as the essentials found to be concerned. Avinash ordered coffee using an automatic machine that is called as self-service, and the clauses were given to the backside of the transaction receipt. As per the terms, café refuses to take any responsibilities in case of any damages to the customer. Under the contract rules offer makes by a party and the other party accepts the order is regarded as the legal contract through considering the given terms and conditions. The consideration concept is discussed in the common law denoting the values sought by the parties entering into this contract. The café has sought for the consideration of the ordered product, and the amount was charged for the sold products. This is the same consideration for Avinash as the product ordered.
It can be concluded from the above discussion on business law assignment that the printed clause validity on the ticket and the café ability is based on avoiding liability. Avinash rights with respect to the contract between café and he present forcibly within the Australian Commonwealth. Avinash can proceed with the consumer protection court to have the remedies and compensation.
(b)Whether the café is legally entitled to rely on the clause printed on the ticket to avoidliability in relation to Avinash’s mishap.
What are the issues identified in this part of business law assignment?
1. WhetherAvinash is addressing as considered and a valid customer or not, that comes under the Competition and Consumer Act 2010, including the common law.
2. Whether the café entitles in paying the compensation or not to Avinash, depend on the matter what has been addressed in the ticket in avoiding the legal responsibility.
According to the Competition and Consumer Protection Act 2010, it is the responsibility to protect the consumer from any means of unfair trade practices that assures the fair competition. Under this law, various unfair trade practices include i) conduct of misleading ii) represent falsely iii) claims insubstantially (Manwaring, 2018).
For the acquiring goods as used by the consumer follows –
i) Purchase of goods for personal and domestic household use. ii) Purchasing of services and goods and paid on the basis of the desired price. iii) The purchase got not crosses the limit of $40,000 amount. Service acquisition for the consumer follows -
i) Service acquisition against the paid amount to purchase the services not exceeding $40,000.
ii) The services are acquired for domestic purpose and personal use.
Cases seek compensation by a consumer to the seller or service provider includes –
i) The purchased goods require safety issues and purchase from the service provider.
ii) Loss or damage to the purchased goods (Cejnar and Duke, 2018). Available rights under the same act include –
i) Right for the safety of the product and protection for the areas of unfair terms of the contract.
ii) Protection to the unsolicited agreements from the consumers.
Avinash is under the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 followed by some rules as discussed below within the business law assignment–
i) The service he has acquired costs $7.55 that does not exceed $40,000.
ii) Before receiving the service he has paid for the required service.
iii) Theacquired goods by him had on the basis of instantutilization basis been not for the trading objectives or supply (Clarke and Scurry, 2020).
Being the consumer Avinash claim the “right t product safety”. He can claims for the compensation for accusing the injury by the products of the company and he can sue it for his harm and could inquire for the court solutions.
With respect to the laws and regulations for the law, Avinash is a customer who follows the definition mentioned in the law. The liability of compensation for Avinash incurs the harms that had made him hurt, purchasing the food item from the café. The service provider has the liability to owe the duty of care and provides compensation to the consumer acquiring the service and faced the damage. The café is liable to pay the safety against the injury, loss or damage.
Herein business law assignment, two contracts have been defined for the case to have the development for the valid contract with obligation and representation. Contracts include both the expressed and implied terms that are beneficial to the parties for the contract (Giancaspro, 2017).
The contract is expressed verbally in words, and it is easier to bind under the legislation. In the express contract, the terms and conditions are described in details, including the detail terms like duration, consideration, delivery that is easier to understand and denoting a valid acceptance (Deep, Singh and Ahmad, 2016).
Implied contracts include no communication but are implemented on the parties on the basis of the actions, behaviours and objective of the parties (Colebatch, 2020). In the present case, the cause was said, but the damage was not taken under the responsibility happened to Avinash that stated the clause was behind the ticket and ambiguous in the case.
In express and implied contracts, a contract is said to be expressed at the time clearly expressed to other parties. The terms should be verbal or in written procedure of communication to other party having no such framework of uncertainty (Becher, 2018). The contract must be granted on the both parties, and for the case of any changes making, it is required to communicate clearly and stated. Necessary essentials for the valid contract must be expressed in the agreement. The implemented contract reflects on the behaviour of the contractual parties and the circumstances. It involves having the benefit for the other party from the actions toward another. The two types of implemented contracts are mentioned below –
- Indicated in law contracts
- Indicated in fact contracts
The indicated law contracts are clear and straight for the parties knowing the circumstances in which performance is required and denoted on those. Visiting a restaurant and ordering food is fair that denotes the fact of the contract. These contracts are enforced as express contracts. It is the display of legal obligation that obliged to perform without consent (Becher, 2020).
The actual contracts are known as Quasi-contracts, and these are decided by the court for the enforcement and called as legal while the court agreed on the same. The contract has one essential element of the contract, and the missing is mutual consent where the court interferes types of contracts in which one party is benefitted on the expenses of other party and injustice to any of the parties.
In the case of Hendrickson v Meredith, 161 Vo. 193, 204, 170 S.E. 602 was included the difference between the express and implied law contracts. All terms are communicated clearly former to the later based on the terms of that conduct on the parties (Wood, 2017).
The contract law and consumer law are the foundation of the case examined in the business law assignmentthat reflects a little light on the distinctions that is entirely distinct. The invention of the contract points out having no lawful relationship with the compensation. The formulation of contract by any of the party for the contract needs to meet the essential elements of the contract and compensation and performance of the lawful contract resolutions, including torts and acts performed by the consumer used by other parties.
Becher, S.I., 2018. Unintended consequences and the design of consumer protection legislation. Tul. L. Rev., 93, p.105.
Becher, S.I., 2020. The Puzzle of Effective Consumer Protection Legislation: Challenges, Key Lessons and Design Principles. The Law and Economics of Regulation, Mathis & Torr eds (Springer, 2021), Forthcoming.
Cejnar, L. and Duke, A., 2018. Competition and fair trading practices in the higher education sector: A comparative review of the position in the UK and Australia. ECLR: European Competition Law Review, 39(1), p.31.
Clarke, M. and Scurry, T., 2020. The role of the psychological contract in shaping graduate experiences: a study of public sector talent management programmes in the UK and Australia. Business law assignmentThe International Journal of Human Resource Management, 31(8), pp.965-991.
Colebatch, H.K. ed., 2020. Beyond the policy cycle: the policy process in Australia. Routledge.
Daly, A., 2018. The introduction of data breach notification legislation in Australia: A comparative view. Computer law & security review, 34(3), pp.477-495.
Deep, S., Singh, D. and Ahmad, S.A., 2016. A review of contract awards to lowest bidder in Indian construction projects via case based approach. Open Journal of Business and Management, 5(1), pp.159-168.
Giancaspro, M., 2017. Is a ‘smart contract’really a smart idea? Insights from a legal perspective. Computer law & security review, 33(6), pp.825-835.
Howells, G. and Weatherill, S., 2017. Consumer protection law. Routledge.
Manwaring, K., 2018. Will Emerging Technologies Outpace Consumer Protection Law? The Case of Digital Consumer Manipulation. Competition and Consumer Law Journal, pp.141-181.
Scott, C., 2018. Enforcing consumer protection laws. In Handbook of Research on International Consumer Law, Second Edition. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Wood, J.T., 2017. Consumer protection: A case of successful regulation. Regulatory Theory, 633.