Contract Law, The Law of Personal Property Essay

Contract Law, The Law of Personal Property - Essay Example exemption clauses. According to the provisions of this act there are three broad divisions of control: first, is the control over contract terms that exclude or restrict liability for 'negligence', secondly, control over contract terms that exclude or restrict liability for breach of certain terms implied by statute or by common law in contracts of sale of goods, hire-purchase etc. Thirdly, a more general control in consumer contracts and standard form contracts over terms that exclude or restrict liability for breach of contract, or which purport to entitle one of the parties to render a contractual performance different from that expected or to render no performance at all. If the term of the contract comes within the purview of this act then the control regime will take its form in either of the two ways i.e. the restriction or exclusion of liability may be rendered absolutely ineffective or it may be effective only in so far as the term of the contract satisfies the test of reasonableness. ... It can be said that subject to certain exceptions, the Unfair Contract Terms Act,1977 only applies to contract terms 'excluding or restricting' specific types of liability; but they are extended to include terms such as : (a) making the liability or its enforcement subject to restrictive or onerous conditions;(b) excluding or restricting any right or remedy in respect of liability, or subjecting a person to any prejudice in consequence of his pursuing any such right or remedy, (c) excluding or restricting rules of evidence or procedure. The practical difficulty, however, is to distinguish such terms from provisions that prevent a contractual duty from arising or circumscribe its extent, or which merely allocate the responsibilities under the contract between the parties(5) The Courts should determine whether a term in a contract 'excludes or restricts' liability by asking whether it deprives a contracting party of the contractual performance which the parties reasonably expected(6). The Unfair Contract Terms Act,1977 for most part exclude or restrict 'business liability'. It means liability for breach of obligations or duties arising - (a) from things done or to be done by a person in the course of a business.; (b) from the occupation of premises used for business purposes of the occupier. As a general rule, greater protection is afforded by the act to a person who deals as consumer than to one who does not. In order that a party should have dealt as consumer, two conditions must have to be satisfied. First, the party must not have made the contract in the course of a business or held himself or herself out as doing so. Secondly, the other party must have made the contract in the course of a business. 'R.&B

Ethics Issue in China Case Report Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Ethics Issue in China Case Report - Essay Example Hence, the main issue was the difficulty to arrive at a decision on whether the operations in China should continue or not. The ethical stance taken by Levi’s with regards to human rights (arbitrary arrests, poor prison conditions, personal privacy) was not possible to follow in China and hence, it created an ethical problem for the organization. The ethical principles that got violated the most are the principles related to Respect for Autonomy and Justice (Trevino and Nelson, 2011). The ethical principle of Respect for Autonomy is based on the tenet that people should have the freedom to reign over them and also take the decisions that they want to. However, in China, Levis Strauss and Co found this violated their ethical stance because the leadershipin China had refused to ratify the 10 basic guidelines which prohibit the use of forced used of labor according to the International Labor Organization. Similarly, the country has also enforced forced family planning, again prov ing to violate the principles related to Respect for Autonomy. The people did not have much choice when it came to these matters of basic human rights and hence, were forced to comply, thus creating an environment where they could not do want they actually wanted to. The ethical principle related to Justice has not also been upheld with regards to human rights in China. ... Levi Strauss and Co has been known as an organization that has taken a very strong stance against any form of ethical violation. Even though there were speculations regarding entering the Chinese market (China’s stand on many human rights issue was known even before the operations began), the plan to operate from China was implemented in the hope that continued presence of many U.S based organizations can have an impact on the stance adopted by China. However, over the years, Levi Strauss realized that the issues were quite big to be solved just with the help of corporate presence. Hence, the organization was faced with a big question of whether to continue its operations for the profitability or to withdraw its operations based on ethical grounds, something that the organization has always proudly endorsed. The China Policy Group as well as deliberations by the senior management failed to come up with a decision regarding China operations. In the end, the CEO took the bold de cision to bring about an end to the operations in China due to ‘pervasive violation of human rights’. A corporate organization does not merely operate with the sole goal to improve its profitability, but in addition, it also forms a set of ethics that would help it achieve its profitability with the help of certain value system. As Levi Strauss and Co had followed, endorsed and promoted these values for a long time, it is difficult for them to operate in an environment where these values do not have meaning. Hence, it becomes an ethical issue and the organization was forced to weigh out their options between ethical stances versus profitability, ultimately deciding to withdraw its operations. 2. Resolve the case using