NAME: MARIUM AQEEL ABIDI

ENROLEMENT NUMBER:02-111222-176
COURSE TITLE: BUSINESS LAW
SUBMITTED TO: SIR QAMAR ABBAS ZAIDI
 PART I

Q1. X promises to Y a diamond ring at the time of his marriage. X fails to give the ring. Can claim
the ring?
Ans. A number of variables, such as the jurisdiction in which this promise was made, the specifics
of the promise, any ancillary agreements, and applicable legal considerations, will determine
whether or not Y is entitled to claim the diamond ring. Y might be able to legally claim the
diamond ring if X agreed to deliver it to them as part of a marriage deal, and Y took advantage of
this promise. Y's ability to claim the diamond ring will rely on a number of variables, including the
jurisdiction in which It might be more difficult for Y to obtain the ring legally, though, if there was
unclear consideration or agreement.
In any event, Y may want to investigate their options and choose the best course of action if they
believe they have a right to the ring by speaking with a lawyer experienced in contract law in their
area.

Q2. X invites Y to dinner. Y accepts the invitation but fails to turn up. Can X sue for the damage?

Ans. Although disrespectful, generally speaking, failing to take up a dinner invitation would
probably not lead to a successful action for damages. This is because social invitations especially
casual ones like dinner invitations usually do not result in a binding legal agreement.
An offer, an acceptance, consideration, and the desire to establish a legal relationship are all
necessary for a contract to be enforceable. Furthermore, in these kinds of cases, there's usually no
aim to establish legal relations.
Furthermore, the damages arising from missing supper would probably be insignificant and
challenging to measure legally, even in the event that there was a formal agreement with
compensation involved. As such, it seems improbable that X could bring a successful damages
lawsuit against Y in this case.

Q3. X Advertises in a newspaper that he would pay Rs.100,000 to anyone who traces his missing
son. Y traced that boy and claimed the amount of reward. State whether Y is entitled to receive
the amount of if (a) he did not know about the reward. (b) if he knew about the reward?
Ans. In this case, Y's eligibility for the reward relies on whether or not she was aware of it prior to
locating her missing kid.
a) If Y happen to be uninformed of the reward: Y would not be eligible to obtain the motivation in
this scenario. Usually, the offer must be known about before the action is completed to satisfy the
requirements of the offer for Y to be eligible to claim the reward. There was no arrangement or
understanding in place that would have entitled Y to the award because Y was unaware of it
beforehand.
b) If Y was informed of the reward: Before locating the missing son, if Y saw the advertisement
providing the reward, then Y might be eligible to get the award. Y would have satisfied the
requirements for the award by accepting the offer and effectively completing the requirements
listed in the advertisement (finding the lost son).
Local rules and precedents may also have an impact on how these situations turn out. For a
specific determination, it would therefore be advisable to check with a legal professional versed
with the legislation of the relevant jurisdiction.
Q4. X Ltd. Was appointed as an agent by Y Ltd., by an agreement. One of the clauses of the
agreement provided. ‘This agreement is not entered into as a format or legal agreement and shall
not be subject to legal jurisdiction in the law courts. Is this agreement a valid contract?
Ans. Given that it states that it is not a formal or legal agreement and is not subject to judicial
jurisdiction, the agreement between X Ltd. and Y Ltd. might not be regarded as a genuine contract.
To be enforceable, contracts normally need the consent of both parties as well as their offer,
acceptance, consideration, and legal ability. The agreement violates these fundamental
components by expressly enunciating formal status and legal authority, which could make it
unenforceable. Furthermore, contracts that try to bar legal action might be against the law or
public policy. As a result, the agreement's legality could be contested, open to different
interpretations by the law, and possibly even unenforceable in court.

Q5. D, a minor borrowed a sum, from M executing a mortgage of his property in favour of M.
Subsequently, D sued for setting aside the mortgage. Is mortgage valid? Can M recover the sum
advanced to D?
Ans. Since children are not legally able to sign legally binding transactions, such as mortgages, the
mortgage that D, a minor, executed is generally void. D may thus file a lawsuit to have the
mortgage set aside. Nonetheless, the law of "necessaries," which permits the recovery of
reasonable value for goods or services required for the benefit of the minor, may still allow M to
recoup the amount advanced to D. Subject to the court's interpretation of what qualifies as
necessities in this particular situation, M may be entitled to recoup the amount advanced if the
money lent by M was used to help D with necessities.
Q6. X Executed a mortgage in favour of Y, a minor who has advanced the money. Is this mortgage
valid?
Ans. No, it is usually regarded as invalid that X completed a mortgage on Favor of Y, a minor. Legal
ability prevents minors from signing legally enforceable agreements, such as mortgages. Y is not
able to hold property rights or uphold contractual duties because they are still a minor. In light of
this, X could not enforce the mortgage. On the other hand, under the notion of "necessaries," X
would still be required to repay any money advanced by Y, so long as the money was spent for
products or services that were considered essential for the kid's benefit. For this reason, even if
the mortgage is void, X can still be responsible for the money that Y supplied.
 PART II
Q. Explain the following concepts:
1. Supervening impossibility:
Supervening impossibility is the term used to describe circumstances in which an unanticipated
event happens after a contract is formed and makes performance impossible. In the case that
events beyond the parties' control—such as natural disasters or governmental regulations make
fulfillment of the contract factually impossible, the parties are released from their duties.

2. stranger to contract:
Someone who is not a party to a contract but wants to enforce its terms is referred to as a
"stranger to contract". Since they did not participate in or profit from the contract's creation, they
typically lack confidentiality of contract, making it impossible for them to enforce the rights or
responsibilities under it.

3. Estopple:
The legal concept named estoppel forbids someone from making a claim, stance, or right that is at
conflict with their previous behaviour, statements, or silence in order to prevent another party
from unfairly relying on it. Holding people responsible for their deeds or representations attempts
to avert injustice.

4. Uberrimae Fidei:
According to Latin, "uberrimae fidei" means "utmost good faith." In insurance contracts, it refers
to the legal requirement that parties disclose all relevant information truthfully and fully. A lack of
action on this section could cause the agreement null and void or subject the person hiding the
information to consequences in court.

5. Mistake of Fact:
A factual error happens when one of the parties to a contract is unaware of an important detail
that was overlooked during the agreement's creation. Should the error be shared, the agreement
could be nullified. In the event of a mistake by one party, the contract can be voidable if the error
is significant and the other party knew or should have known.