Scribd
Upload
10 views

MGT611 Assignment 1

Uploaded by

LUBNA JAVED
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
10 views

MGT611 Assignment 1

Uploaded by

LUBNA JAVED
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

ASSIGNMENT (MGT 611) SOLUTION FALL 2024

Name:

Sana Javed

Student ID:

Bc230205445

Course code:

Mgt611

Submitted by:

Sana Javed

Submitted too:

Mr Khalil Ahmad Rao

SOLUTION
Here's a legal analysis of each scenario:

(a) Remedy for the Aggrieved Thief in the Sale of a Stolen Painting:
However, in the given case, the contract between the members of the gang to split
the stolen proceeds is unlawful because it is a contract for unlawful activities. The
contract arises out of an unlawful act of theft and, therefore, the law cannot compel
it to be performed. Contracts involving the commission of a crime are generally
treated as legally null and void under contract law.

Remedies Available to the Aggrieved Thief:

Since the contract is unlawful, the thief cannot seek any legal redress against the
wrong refused to award him a rightful portion of the embezzled money. The thief
cannot go to court and seek remedies or enforcement of rights under the contract.
According to the law, nobody can compel the performance of any person to do
something, and this is particularly the case where the agreement was entered into
as a result of a crime.
(b) Agreement Between Basit and Taha Regarding the Return of
Stolen Items:
In this scenario, Taha offers to return stolen items if Basit withdraws his lawsuit.
Such an agreement is generally unenforceable as it is contrary to public policy.
Agreements that seek to impede justice, such as a promise to withdraw criminal
charges in exchange for restitution, lack legal validity. Criminal matters involve
the state, and victims cannot privately settle criminal offenses through agreements.
Hence, while Basit might choose to withdraw his complaint, the agreement itself
has no legal standing.

(c) Yousuf’s Promise to Paint Ibrahim’s Horse and Subsequent


Death:
The contract between Yousuf and Ibrahim is a personal service contract, as it
involves Yousuf’s skill and talent to paint. Personal service contracts are typically
discharged if the party obligated to perform dies, as the obligation cannot be
transferred or fulfilled by someone else. Therefore, the contract is considered
terminated by Yousuf’s death, and Ibrahim cannot demand performance from
anyone else. The legal status of this contract is that it is discharged due to
impossibility of performance.

(d) Unrealistic Timeframe in a Service Contract:


A contract that sets an impossible or unrealistic timeframe (e.g., 24 hours for a task
requiring a week) can be deemed unenforceable or voidable due to impracticality
or “impossibility of performance.” If both parties knowingly entered into the
agreement with an understanding of the unrealistic terms, the contract might be
voided. In many cases, courts consider such terms unreasonable and unenforceable
because they are inconsistent with good faith and fair dealing.

In such a scenario, the contract is rendered voidable or unenforceable as the case


may be. In contract law, there are provisions that state that where one party puts
forward conditions that are oppressive or beyond the reach of the other party, there
exists the possibility of the contract being held as unenforceable or even void. In
this case, the service provider might counter by claiming that the terms are
incongruous to perform and therefore cannot be enforced legally. Also, the court
may also look at whether an unrealistic time frame is in line with bad faith or an
attempt to ensure that the other party is placed at a disadvantage which will also be
grounds to declare the contract invalid.

Each scenario illustrates principles about contracts involving illegal purposes,


public policy, personal service, and impractical terms.

You might also like