Operation Of Franchisees Under Established Business Premises - 825 Words

Studying The Operation Of The Franchisees Under The Established Business Premises (Case Study Sample) Content: Business LawStudents NameInstitutional AffiliationBusiness LawLearning Activity 1In this case, Oil Company had agreed upon delivering Airlines orders throughout the year at a price of $1.50 per gallon. Therefore, the seller had the responsibility to provide the products as requested by the client (Mayer, 2012). In addition, the agreement stated that Airlines offer could not be withdrawn throughout the year. Thus, the seller had to deliver the goods and conforming to the standards as ordered by Airlines. The Oil Companys delay and failure to provide the product might have led to Airline incurring losses. As a result, the airline was entitled to compensation.Learning Activity 2Marys situation is not different from what other buyers undergo in the market. It is fundamental to note that the seller breached the agreement by delivering goods that were significantly different from what the customer expected. However, Mary is bound by the fine print provisions and cannot just ify her claims. For instance, the clause states that the clothing maker had the right to substitute colors and was not liable for any defective or faulty merchandise. Therefore, the buyer is bound to accept the goods the way they are delivered.Learning Activity 3It is fundamental to note that due to the losses incurred throughout Rays drive, the company and Racing are liable to various parties. Ray and the company are liable to Mumbles and Stumbles as a result of the accident that caused him injuries. However, the company might not be responsible to Unbelievable since Ray hit him while operating outside the companys schedule. On the other hand, Flyer can claim compensation from Ray and the company if he proves beyond reasonable doubts that the cars backfiring caused him to jump on the part of a car that injured him. Otherwise, the company cannot be held accountable.Learning Activity 4In this case, Amy is bound to Jewels agreement but not Teapots contract. Amy, on behalf of Winsome W ays, had informed her suppliers that Connie was in charge of the companys operations. Therefore, any agreement she could commit was valid. On the other hand, Jacks contracts were null and void since he was not given authority by Amy to manage the company or sign any deal with suppliers.Learning Activity 5In this case, Kate, as the manager, is entitled to compensation for the time and energy spent in managing LLC. Although Jake has played an active role in managing the company, he is not identified as a manager, thus, does not qualify for any compensation. However, they are liable on the unperformed contract since the other managers did not approve it. It is fundamental to note that this case is different from a limited partnership due to the fact that there are no precisely defined limited and general members.Learning Activity 6Since Lisa was a limited partner, she was not entitled to personal liability for partnership debts. On the other hand, Ted, another limited partner, was not liable for the partnership debts but was held accountable f...