Nur Syazwani Binti Mohamad Rosli

2018692484
AAP1151C

TUTORIAL CHAPTER 2

1. Discuss a valid,void,voidable and illegal contracts.

-Section 2(h) of Contract Act 1950 provide that a valid contract is an agreement
enforceable by law.
-Section 2(g) of Contract Act 1950 provide that an agreement not enforceable by law
is void.
-Section 2(j) of Contract Act 1950 provide that illegal contract a ceases to be
enforceable by law become void when it ceased to be enforceable.

2. The effect of a counter-offer

Counter-offer can be well explained in Hyde v. Wrench.The facts of the case is the
defendant offered to sell his estate to the plaintiff on 6 June for $1000.On 8 June,in
reply the plaintiff made a counter-offer to purchase at $950.When the defendant
refused to accept this offer on 27 June,the plaintiff wrote again that he was prepared
to pay the original sum demanded.When the plaintiff made a counter-offer,the
original offer was rejected which means that there was no acceptance.There was no
contract existed.

3. Inadequacy of consideration

Inadequacy of consideration can be well explained in Phang Swee Kim v. Beng I

Hock (1964).The facts of the case is the responded agreed to transfer to the
appellant a parcel of land on a payment of $500 although the land was worth much
more.The responded later refused to honour the promise after knowing that $500
was below the market value therefore not enforceable.The first judge ruled that the
agreement was void due to inadequacy of consideration.However on appeal judge
certiori the quash the first rule by using the Explanation 2 and illustration (f) provided
under Section 26 of Contract Act 1950.

4. Intention to create a legal relation

There are 2 cases that have domestic agreement which is Balfour v. Balfour and
Merrit v. Merrit.English law provide that a domestic agreement has intention and no
intention.For case who has intention can be well explained in case Balfour v.
Balfour.The facts of the case is the defendant was a civil servant stationed in Ceylon
and promised to pay his wife in England a monthly allowance if she could accompany
him in Ceylon.The wife could not accompany him abroad because of her poor helath
condition.The husband defaulted the promise,and the wife sued him.The Held said
there was no intention to create legal relations as there was no legal or agreement.

For case Merrit v. Merrit provide that they have a intention.On joint name
mortgage,the husband agreed to play $40 monthly and outstanding payment paid by
his wife.Upon completion of the payment,his husband will transfer the house to his
wife as a sole ownership.This promise is recorded in a piece of paper and signed by
the husband.Later,the husband refused to transfer the house upon the wife full
settlement.The Held said there was an intended legal relations,thus a valid contract
was formed.Thus,the court ordered the transfer of the property to the plaintiff.
5. Postal Rule

Section 4(2)(a) Contract Act 1950 provide that in postal,the acceptance is complete
when it is put in a course of transmission to the proposer.It can be well explained
from case Ignatius v. Bell.The plaintiff was given an option agreement regarding the
option to purchase the defendant’s right over a piece of land.The option was to be
exercised on or before 20th of August 1912.The parties have contemplated the use of
the post as a means of communication.The plaintiff sent a notice of acceptance by
registered post in Klang on 6th of August but it was not delivered until the evening 25th
of August because the defendant was away.During the period,the letter remained in
the office at Kuala Selangor until picked up by the defendant.The Held said Section 4
applies.The plaintiff has duty exercised the option when he posted the letter on 6th of
August 1912.

6. Contract entered by minor

Section 11 Contract Act 1950 provide that contract can only be entered by person
who has full capacity,otherwise become void,refer to case Mohari Bibee v.
Dhurmodas Ghose (1903).The issue for the case is Lack of capacity.Facts of the
case is the appellant through his agent lent the infant the sum of Rs20000 at 12%
interest and secured the loan by way of mortgage.The appellant knew that the
responded was an infant.Later,the guardian commenced an action for mortgage but
was rejected because of lack of capacity.The Held said the contract of loan entered
by a minor was void,not voidable.

7. Uncertainty of terms

Section 30 in Contract Act 1950 provides that an agreement without certainty of

terms is void.It can be well explained too the case of Karuppan Chetty v. Suah
Tian.The plaintiff agreed to give the defendant to rent his premise for $35 a month for
“as long as he likes”.One day,the plaintiff terminated the rent but the defendant
refused because he can rent the premise for however long he likes.The Held said “as
long as he likes” was not certain,thus void.

8. Remedies if one party breaches a contract

There are many common remedies available if there is breach of contract which is
rescission,damages,specific performance,injunction and quantum meruit.
-Rescission is when the innocent party can rescind the contract.
-Section 75 Contract Act 1950 provides that damages is when the innocent party can
claim for compensation for any damages sustained by the party who breach the
contract.
-Specific performance is a discretionary remedy granted by the court.It means that
the court is directing that the contract must be performed according to its terms refer
to case Duncuff v. Albrecht (1841).The issue was uniqueness of term.Facts of the
case is agreement for the sell of railway shares was made but then the defendant
refused to sell the shares.The court has granted specific performance of an
agreement for the sale of railway shares which were limited in numbers and not
always to be had in the open market.
-Section 51 Contract Act 1950 provide that a discretionery remedies for temporary or
perpetual.
-Quantum Meruit is an award where one party has completed all or part of the
performance before the other’s breach.It is a payment of the amount deserved for
what has been done up until the breach.
9. Possible ways a contract can be terminated

There are many possible way a contract can be terminated which is discharge by
performance,discharge by consent,discharge by frustration and discharge by breach.
-Section 40 Contract Act 1950 provide that parties need to perform in accordance
with the terms of the contract unless agreed otherwise.Refer to case Eng Mee Yong
v. Letchumanan (1979),the issue was time is essential.Facts of the case is the effect
of failure to pay the price within a specified date where time is the essence of the
contract.The Held said that the caveator had breached a condition of the sale
agreement which entitle the caveatees to elect to treat the contract as the end.The
contract is void.
-Discharge by consent is when both parties agree that the contract should no longer
continue,then both are discharged from their obligation.
-Section 57(2) Contract Act 1950 provide that a contract is frustrated when there is a
change in the circumstances which renders a contract illegally or physically
impossible.The effect of frustration is the contract does not become voidable,but it
brought to an end.
-Section 65 Contract Act provide that a refusal or cancellation by either party to
perform a contract would amount to a discharge.The effect of an innocent party
putting an end to the contract is that the innocent party is entitled to recover the sum
he has paid.
Nur Syazwani Binti Mohamad Rosli
2018692484
AAP1151C

CHAPTER 1

1. Explained the jurisdiction of Subordinate Courts

Sessions Courts

First Class

Second Class

First Class

Trial Jurisdiction

There are 3 type of first class which is civil,criminal and sentencing.Civil jurisdiction is
a monetary jurisdiction up to RM 25,000.00.
Criminal jurisdiction is can try to offences on :
a) punishable with imprisonment not exceeding 10 years, or
b) punishable with fine only or
c) under Section 392 Penal Code i.e robbery on the highway between sunset and
sunrise punishable with a maximum of 14 years imprisonment,or
d) under section 457 Penal Code i.e. house breaking at night to commit theft
punishable with a maximum of 14 years imprisonment.

Sentencing Jurisdiction

Section 87(1) Subordinate Courts Act 1st Class Magistrate can punish the offender
with :
a) imprisonment not exceeding 5 years
b)fine not exceeding RM 10,000
c)whipping up to maximum 12 strokes
d)a combination of (a)-(c)
e) in civil matter the Magistrate can fine up RM 25,000

Second Class

Trial Jurisdiction

Civil : Section 92 Subordinate Courts Act 1948 provide that monetary jurisdiction up
to RM 3000.00

Criminal : Section 88 Subordinate Courts Act 1948 provide that 2nd Class Magistrate
can try offences punishable with :
a) imprisonment not exceeding 6 months
b) a fine only
Sentencing Jurisdiction

Section 89 Subordinate Courts Act 1948 2nd Class Magistrate can punish an offender
with :
a) imprisonment not exceeding 6 months
b) a fine not exceeding RM 1000 or
c) both

Sessions Courts

Trial Jurisdiction

Civil :
a) Section 65(1)(a) Subordinate Courts Acts 1948 provides that unlimited monetary
jurisdiction in respect of motor vehicle accidents and landlord and tenants dispute
and distress
b) Section 65(1)(b) Subordinate Courts Acts 1948 provides that on other matters
monetary,jurisdiction up to RM 250,000.00
c) Section 66(2) Subordinate Courts Acts 1948 provides that the High Court has the
power to or make an order the matter to be transferred to the Sessions Courts.

Criminal : Section 64 Subordinate Courts Acts 1948 provides that can try any
offences except those punishable with death.

Sentencing Jurisdiction

Section 64 Subordinate Courts Acts 1948 provides that can pass any sentence
except death.