Monday 22 July 2024
Your weekly SQE Prep Quiz has arrived
Dear Subscriber,
I hope you had a great weekend. Please see below for the question, the answer to the previous question and associated resources. This is the web version of this newsletter.
GOOD LUCK TO EVERYONE CONTINUING WITH SQE1 TODAY!!!
Question: Samantha decides to purchase a vintage car from Classic Motors Ltd. Before the sale, the salesperson at Classic Motors Ltd. tells Samantha that the car has only 20,000 miles on the odometer and has never been in an accident. The salesperson knew this not to be the case, but was keen to make a sale in order to impress her boss. Relying on these statements, Samantha purchases the car for £25,000. After a few weeks, the car suffers a break down. Samantha takes the car to her mechanic for repair, only to discover that the car has actually travelled 80,000 miles and has been involved in a major accident that was not disclosed. Feeling cheated, Samantha wants to take legal action against Classic Motors Ltd. for misrepresentation.
Which of the following best describes the type of misrepresentation Samantha has likely encountered, and the remedies available to her?
- Fraudulent misrepresentation; Samantha can rescind the contract and claim damages, including damages for any losses caused by the misrepresentation.
- Negligent misrepresentation; Samantha can rescind the contract and claim damages, including consequential losses under the Misrepresentation Act 1967.
- Innocent misrepresentation; Samantha can choose to rescind the contract or claim damages, but not both.
- Fraudulent misrepresentation; Samantha can choose to rescind the contract and claim damages, including exemplary damages to punish Classic Motors Ltd.
- Negligent misrepresentation; Samantha can claim damages under the Misrepresentation Act 1967 but cannot rescind the contract if the court deems it unreasonable.
Special Offer: Want an AI SQE tutor? Newsletter subscribers benefit from a special discount to Practice Works AI-led learning support for SQE1. Visit https://www.practiceworks.io/sqe-prep and use IOANNIS20 for 20% off any paid plan (limited availability, time is running out!). Terms & Conditions apply.
Study Material: For more on the topic of this week’s question see the video linked here and if you are looking for a relevant* title, see here. Free Study Planner: You can download our SQE1 Study Planner for the January 2025 exam by clicking here.
Answer and feedback to last week’s question: Tom, a professional landscaper, entered into a contract with Green Gardens Ltd. to provide landscaping services for their new commercial property. The contract stipulated that Tom would complete the landscaping work within three months for a total fee of £15,000, with £5,000 to be paid upfront and the remaining £10,000 upon completion. Tom started the work as agreed but experienced significant delays due to unforeseen weather conditions and shortages of materials. As a result, the project extended to five months. Green Gardens Ltd. refused to pay the remaining £10,000, arguing that Tom breached the contract by failing to complete the work on time. Tom believes that he is entitled to the remaining payment despite the delays.
Which of the following principles is most relevant in determining whether Tom can recover the remaining £10,000 for his services despite the delays?
- The principle of frustration
- The principle of substantial performance
- The principle of quantum meruit
- The principle of anticipatory breach
- The principle of liquidated damages
Correct Answer: 2. The principle of substantial performance. Feedback: The principle of substantial performance is relevant in determining whether Tom can recover the remaining £10,000 despite the delays. Under this principle, if a contractor has completed the majority of the contractual obligations and only minor aspects are incomplete or delayed, the contractor may still be entitled to payment, subject to deductions for the incomplete or delayed work. In this scenario, if Tom can demonstrate that he substantially performed the landscaping services despite the delays caused by unforeseen circumstances, he may be entitled to the remaining payment, possibly adjusted for any deficiencies or delays. The other principles are not directly applicable in this context: Frustration: This applies when a contract becomes impossible to perform due to unforeseen events, which is not the case here. Quantum meruit: This applies when there is no contract or the contract is unenforceable, and payment is made for the value of work done. Anticipatory breach: This occurs when one party indicates they will not perform their contractual obligations before the performance is due. Liquidated damages: This refers to a predetermined amount specified in the contract to be paid in case of a breach, which is not mentioned in this scenario. Therefore, the principle of substantial performance is the most relevant in determining Tom’s right to recover the remaining payment for his services.
Thank you for subscribing and let me know how you are getting on in your preparation through our Facebook Group. Feel free to forward this email to anyone you think will benefit.
If you wish to unsubscribe: You can stop receiving the newsletter at any time by emailing us at newsletter@glintiss.co.uk with ‘unsubscribe’ as the subject. We will promptly remove your email address from our mailing list. Thank you for being with us.
You will hear from me again soon.
All the best
Dr Ioannis Glinavos
*As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases.
Leave a Reply