Common Law of Contracts
COMMON LAW OF CONTRACTS 2
Common Law of Contracts
Case Study 1
The uniform commercial code (UCC) refers to one of the many regulations that have
been formulated in a bid to harmonize the sales processes and commercial transactions
throughout the United States (Klass, 2010). All the 50 states in the nation, the District of
Columbia and all the US territories have adopted this law. While searching for a gift for his
father’s birthday, Danny ventured into the Butt Hutt, a cigar shop, because his father loved
cigarettes. The store owner claimed that the new brand of cigarettes he had pointed out were
imported from Jamaica and upon testing one cigarette, Danny was satisfied and this led to his
acceptance of the contract. Regardless, when his father smoked the first and second cigarettes, he
produced an offensive smell and consumed him in less than four minutes. Returning the product
to the shop yielded no results forcing him to sue the shop. Following this case study, it is evident
that the store went against the Common Law of Contracts, particularly the good faith law.
This aspect of the Common Law of Contracts implies that all the parties involved in an
agreement should deal with pure honesty, fairness, and good faith (Klass, 2010). The good faith
law ensures that one party should not interfere with the other’s right to gain the benefits of the
contract. Faith is abstract in nature and includes a sincere belief that lacks any malice or
intentions to defraud others. In the case presented, the shop owner told Danny that the brand of
cigars is imported from Jamaica which was a misrepresentation on his part. To add to the lie, the
shop owner compared the brand to the original Cuban cigars confusing the young man who did
not even know how a cigar tastes like. The lies projected by the shop owner painted a wrong
image of the product leading to lawsuits. The good faith requirement desires that honesty is
COMMON LAW OF CONTRACTS 3
upheld which was the missing factor in the formation and execution of the contract leading to its
breach (Klass, 2010).
Case study 2
Upon entering a partnership, Jefferson and Marcy decided to purchase a television from
Bundy Electronics where they have joint and several liability. The seller is a large retailer who
sells electrical appliances and electronics throughout the country. The conditions of the contract
is that the product is to be paid for when it arrives. However, after the contract was agreed on,
the supplying truck had an accident and the goods were damaged beyond repair. According to
the UCC’s codes protecting the contract, the seller, that is Bundy Electronics, would assume the
loss of the product until the proxy arrives at the desired destination (Cabrelli, 2016). In other
words, if the television had reached the destination and is damaged, then Marcy and Jefferson
would assume the loss. In this sense, the contract becomes void because the buyers did not gain
physical possession of the television.
This article is activated when the contract is breached like I this case the truck got an
accident, and the product got damaged. Considering the possibility that the television did not
incur any damage while it was en route, the seller would then not assume the loss. This is
because the product would have reached the buyers, who are Marcy and Jefferson. Taking
physical possession of goods would imply that the contract would have been completed
(Cabrelli, 2016). No physical damage to the product would not put the seller in a disadvantaged
position even if the truck that was delivering it was involved in the loss. The contract would
therefore still be viable. This is in conjunction with Article 2 of the Common Law of Contracts
which covers not only the sales but also the repudiation of a contract (Cabrelli, 2016).
COMMON LAW OF CONTRACTS 4
Reference
Cabrelli, D. (2016). Liability and Remedies for Breach of the Contract of Employment at
Common Law: Some Recent Developments. Industrial Law Journal, 45(2), 207-219.
Klass, G. (2010). Contract law in the USA. Austin [Tex.: Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.
