Example Of Essay On Law

Law Assignment

Law Assignment

Part A

Anne’s Case
For Anne’s case with passageway, she should first of all refer to the agreement that she had made regarding the purchase to be aware about the terms and conditions. According to the UK Sale of Goods Acts 1893, applicable in England and Ireland, implied conditions may involve the seller, using the best of his knowledge to notify the buyer that he is selling the right kinds of goods. Moreover, it is an implied warranty that the buyer will have good possession and enjoyment of the purchase (s2). If the seller is supposed to sell by description, there is an implied condition that the goods will correspond to his descriptions. Further, if the buyer had informed the seller about the kind of goods she wanted, it would become an implied condition that he sells to the buyer the goods with features that corresponds to her descriptions. Nevertheless, there is an implied condition that the goods will have to conform to the function for which they are being bought. However, it should be noted that the buyer may chose to loosen the condition. In the Anne’s case, since the passageway is very essential for her comfortable use of the house, it becomes a condition of sale, because without it the house would not be fit for the stay. Moreover, taking into account that she had already informed the solicitor about it, although the latter ignored, it also becomes a condition. Therefore, any breach of the conditions in this contract will repudiate it, and Anne can claim damages.
Brenda case: The case of Brenda is “theft by finding”. In this regard, although she chanced upon money that was on the ground, she did take any step toe establish whether, it had been abandoned or merely lost. In this case, although she may take the physical property of the money she may not have the ownership, since the owner has not abandoned all rights. This can be illustrated in the following cases
R. v. West (1854) 6 Cox C. C. 417 (stall-keeper appropriating purse left on stall by customer)
R. v. Moore (1861) L. & C. 1, 169 E. R. 1278 (barber-shop keeper converting banknote picked up on floor after a customer had purchased some hair oil)

Danielle Vs Erick’s Case

For the Danielle and Erick’s case, they also should refer to the implied conditions and warrants of their contracts. In this regard, the statues and the garden for the house may not qualify as conditions, since Danielle had not mentioned them explicitly in the contract. Further, since their mere absence cannot stop one from using the house they may be taken as warrants and would not repudiate the contract Sale of Goods Acts 1893 (s 2).

Fredrick and Giles’ Case

When a person acquires a trespass permission, it is possible that he can be allowed to stay in one’s property like land for the period permitted. In the regard, one may get a land permission card to stay there. However, if anyone takes any property there, without permission, he would be charged with additional class B Misdemeanor. Moreover, the harvested or taken property like old coins will be subject to seizure. This was illustrated in Robinson v Everett and W. & F.C. Bonham & Son Ltd (1988) CLR 699(See Robinson v Everett and W. &F.C. Bonham & Son Ltd (1980 Crim. LR 699). Although the defendants had been allowed in the land as tourists or animal watchers they were sued for killimg, injuring or taking wild birds. However, in this case therefore the trespasser, Fredrick, could have defenses like having obtained both implied and expressed permission by the owner and possessor of the land. However, if the permission is revoked Fredrick will obviously become a trespasser. In Doe d Carter v Barnard, the defendant can simply prove that the land trespassed does not belong to the owner.

Fredrick versus Henry

First Fredrick will be charged with trespass to land, by passing through somebody’s land that he was not aware, without prior permission. Secondly, he will be charged with engaging in unpermitted explorations in one’s field and collecting jeweled items and gold.
For Henry, it seems that he trespassed his land without lawful excuse, and it is an offence that the claimant can bring forward so long as he has uncontested proof. In this regard, his case did not involve any accidental trespass, although it could also incur the trespass liability. In River Wear Commissioners v Adamson the defendant had entered the land adjoin the road unintentionally and he was charged, although accidentally, as having trespassed due to negligence. Therefore one can realize that negligence can also be another cause of legal actions against a tortfeasor. The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 has illustrated cases in which trespass could also be a crime. In this regard, under the 1994 Act, the damages caused by a trespasser could justify his criminal intensions, but mere intrusion may not be termed as criminal offences. In this regard, when trespass is done with an intension of committing sexual offence or burglary, it will obviously constitute a criminal offence. In the Criminal Damage Act of 1971, it is stated as:
“A person who without lawful excuse destroys or damages any property belonging to another intending to destroy or damage any such property or being reckless as to whether such property would be destroyed or damaged shall be guilty of an offence.”
However, civil law has put it as the unjustifiable intrusion by one person in a certain land and possession of what belongs there. Therefore in this case, Fredrick will be sued, in civil law, for unlawful intrusion into one’s land and possession of the minerals. However, it is possible that he could have committed criminal offences if his exploration acts constituted damaging the environment. Fredrick can use some defenses to offset the allegations by justifying that he was in necessity or his stolen items had been kept there, and so forth. For instance in Anthony v Haney, it was permissible that an innocent person could move into one’s property without legal authorities to obtain his lost or stolen items.

PART B: The Case for Claudette, Vic, Lem, Ronnie, Danielle, Shane and Dutch

Corrine
Corrine had been married to Vic. When the latter died he had made a will to leave his property to the police station and a charitable organization. Therefore since no executor has been named, Corrine has to look for the administrator or become the one for the appropriation of Vic’s wealth. Since he died leaving a will, his properties would be shared out following the rules in it. In this regard, only civil or married partners will stand to inherit such properties. From the will, it is apparent that Corinne is not mentioned; it will be upon her to prove that she is Vic’s spouse and contest the will for her inclusion. If there are surviving children, and or grandchildren, the wealth must be above £250,000 for them to inherit. Other close relatives may also inherit the wealth depending on its value: children, grandchildren, any surviving or married couple and so forth. However, the priority should come as grandparents, uncle and aunts, and half-uncle and half aunts.

Danielle

However, for Danielle, although she had an affair with Vic, under such circumstances, she will have to prove that indeed although not married their relationship had been registered as civil partnership. According to the UK law only those that have similar sex, and living together as spouses would qualify, but not people of different sexes. Thus, she would be disqualified on such grounds.

Nina

For Nina, she was Shane’s girlfriend. Shane died without making any will. Her wealth appropriation will be determined by the administrator, whom she will have to keep in touch in this regard. Just like Danielle with Vic, she will also not receive any piece of wealth, because she was not in marriage or civil partnership with him. According to the UK Civil Partnership Act 2004, all parties under civil partnership must be of the same sex, with essentially the same responsibilities as opposite marriage couples. Therefore Nina cannot be entitled to inherit Shane’s property on such grounds. However, if she had children with him she can take them for appropriation of wealth among other relatives.

Mara

Mara was Shane’s wife, but she had been divorced and thus she cannot claim any inheritance. The law states that anybody who has been divorced or whose legal status of civil partnership has ended will not be considered for inheritance. However, if she had children with Shane, she can take them for the inheritance. Since Shane will lack all spouses that could inherit his wealth, it is notable that children can inherit all wealth.

Dutch

The Dutch’s case is quite different, as for him, Ronnie had left property under an enforceable will. Apart from getting his share, he is also to give half of it to Tina and some amount to Claudette. However, for the will to qualify, it will be important if the testator identified himself as the true maker of the will, as signified by words on its face. Dutch should make sure that there were no previous wills to bring conflict; he should inform those who may be holding them that they could have been revoked. However, the testator should have been in the right capacity for it to remain valid, or else, it may be revoked easily. Moreover, since he was one of the witnesses he should check by the law to find out if he is qualified to receive portions of wealth from the testator. One or more beneficiaries should have been clearly stated on the will. However, since he was not his spouse he should be aware that the wife of the deceased may choose to contest the will, because her inheritance has not been included. Since he is the main beneficiary, he will obviously become an executor. Therefore he will have to determine solicitor’s fees for executing it. Since she has been left with a child, Tina, he will put her part of inheritance in a trust fund until she reaches the age of majority is when she can receive it. If Ronnie was divorced, it obviously means that the part that could belong to his wife is now counseled.

Claudette

For Claudette, she will have to determine how much she will get by consulting with a solicitor. Obviously she will be in touch with Dutch to get her fair share. Further, she should be aware that the likely spouse(s) of Ronnie could contest the will, since they are not included.

Bibliography

BBC, 'Law stopping NI gay couples adopting is challenged'(BBC News, 2011) <http:
//www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-15792101.> Accessed 08 April 2015.
Bermingham, Vera and Brennan, Carol, Tort Law,(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008).
Citisen Guide, ‘Who Can Inherit If There Is No Will – The Rules of Intestacy' (Adviceguide,
2015)<http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/england/relationships_e/relationships_death_and_wills_e/who_can_inherit_if_there_is_no_will___the_rules_of_intestacy.htm> Accessed 08 April 2015.
Citizens Information, 'Marital Status and Inheritance' (Citizen Information i.e,
2015)<http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/birth_family_relationships/married_couples/marital_status_and_inheritance.html> Accessed 08 April 2015.
CPS, ‘Wildlife Offences,’ (CPS.gov.uk, 2015)
<http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/v_to_z/wildlife_offences/> Accessed 08 April 2015.
Elliot, Catherine and Quinn, Francis, Tort Law (6th ed.)(London: Longman, 2011).
FindLaw UK, 'Trespassing and the Law' (FindLaw.co.uk, 2015)
<http://www.findlaw.co.uk/law/property/other_property_law_topics/500447.html> Accessed 08 April 2015.
House of Commons, Trespass To Land, (London: House of Commons Library, 2015).1-6.
Smith, Kenneth, and Keenan, Denis J, English Law (14th ed.) (New York: Pearson Education
Ltd., 2004).
Indians Kanoon, "Cases of Indian Succession Act," (Indiankanoon.Org,
2015)<http://www.indiankanoon.org/search/?formInput=cases%20of%20indian%20succession%20act> Accessed 08 April 2015.
South Gloucestershire Council, 'Responsibilities and Liabilities of The Landlord And
Agent,'(Private Housing Information, 2015)<http://www.privatehousinginformation.co.uk/site/102.asp> Accessed 08 April 2015.
The National Archives, 'Sale of Goods Act 1893' (Legislation.gov.uk,
2015)<http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1893/71/part/I/crossheading/sale-by-sample/enacted> Accessed 08 April 2015.
The Scotsman, 'Consultation sees 50,000 responses,' (The Scotsman.com,
2011)<http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/consultation-sees-50-000-responses-1-2001639> Accessed 08 April 2015.
UK Government, ‘Wills, Probate and Inheritance,’ (Gov.uk, 2015)<https://www.gov.uk/wills-
probate-inheritance/if-the-person-didnt-leave-a-will> Accessed 08 April 2015.
Wilkinson, Brendan, ' Theft by Finding' (Lawyers.com,
2015)<http://www.lawyers.com.au/brendan-wilkinson-criminal-lawyer/article/theft-by-finding-1/> Accessed 08 April 2015.