LAW2003 Assignment #2
Question # 00566450
Posted By:
Updated on: 07/26/2017 03:31 AM Due on: 07/26/2017
Assignment #2
Directions: Answer the two questions below. Your answer should be typed, in 12 point font and
double spaced. Your responses should be approximately 500 to 750 words each. This
assignment is due on July 27, at the beginning of the class. I will accept assignments up until
12:05 p.m. After that there will be a 10% late penalty. I will not accept assignments beyond
August 3, 2017. I have provided the names of cases that you can refer to. You must also refer to
your text. If you wish to use any other materials, please speak to me first. Please provide a
bibliography.
1. CMLQ Investors Company v. Cajary Building Corporation, et al., 1999 CanLII 3797 (ON CA)
— 1999-11-23
2. Canada v. Merchant Law Group, 2010 FCA 206 (CanLII) — 2010-08-05
3. Crown Manufacturers Ltd. v. Texas Refinery Corp. of Canada Limited, 1984 CanLII 2434 (SK
CA) — 1984-02-09
4. Crampsey et al. v. Deveney, 1967 CanLII 26 (ON CA)
5. Hodgkinson v. Simms, [1994] 3 SCR 377, 1994 CanLII 70 (SCC)
6. Backman v. Canada, [2001] 1 SCR 367, 2001 SCC 10 (CanLII)
7. Spire Freezers Ltd. v. Canada, [2001] 1 SCR 391, 2001 SCC 11 (CanLII)
Question One
Peter entered into a contract with Howard, an auctioneer. The contract stated that Howard was
to sell some vacant land that Peter owned. The catalogue for the auction set out the conditions
for sales at the auction and said that the auctioneer had no authority to make representations on
behalf of anyone whose property was to be sold at the auction.
Robert wanted to bid on a property; he asked Howard whether the property was zoned for
commercial development. Howard said that it was, but Howard was mistaken. There was only
zoning for agricultural use. Robert bought the property at the auction, relying on what Howard
had told him about zoning. But once he discovered that he could not use the property for
commercial purposes, he refused to pay for the property.
Can Peter enforce his contract with Robert?
Question Two
Susan and Joyce were both accountants carrying on business as sole proprietors. They
decided to enter into an arrangement that would reduce their expenses. i. they rented premises consisting of three offices and a reception area, where they both could
practice. Each signed the lease as a tenant.
ii. They hired a secretary to work for both of them.
iii. They will each contribute equally to the office expenses
iv. Apart from those shared expenses, all expenses are the responsibility of the person incurring
them
v. All decisions regarding management of the office such as the salary of the shared secretary
require the consent of both Susan and Joyce.
vi. Each will bill and be exclusively entitled to the fees received in return for their own work.
Is this a partnership? To be certain, what other information would you need?
Directions: Answer the two questions below. Your answer should be typed, in 12 point font and
double spaced. Your responses should be approximately 500 to 750 words each. This
assignment is due on July 27, at the beginning of the class. I will accept assignments up until
12:05 p.m. After that there will be a 10% late penalty. I will not accept assignments beyond
August 3, 2017. I have provided the names of cases that you can refer to. You must also refer to
your text. If you wish to use any other materials, please speak to me first. Please provide a
bibliography.
1. CMLQ Investors Company v. Cajary Building Corporation, et al., 1999 CanLII 3797 (ON CA)
— 1999-11-23
2. Canada v. Merchant Law Group, 2010 FCA 206 (CanLII) — 2010-08-05
3. Crown Manufacturers Ltd. v. Texas Refinery Corp. of Canada Limited, 1984 CanLII 2434 (SK
CA) — 1984-02-09
4. Crampsey et al. v. Deveney, 1967 CanLII 26 (ON CA)
5. Hodgkinson v. Simms, [1994] 3 SCR 377, 1994 CanLII 70 (SCC)
6. Backman v. Canada, [2001] 1 SCR 367, 2001 SCC 10 (CanLII)
7. Spire Freezers Ltd. v. Canada, [2001] 1 SCR 391, 2001 SCC 11 (CanLII)
Question One
Peter entered into a contract with Howard, an auctioneer. The contract stated that Howard was
to sell some vacant land that Peter owned. The catalogue for the auction set out the conditions
for sales at the auction and said that the auctioneer had no authority to make representations on
behalf of anyone whose property was to be sold at the auction.
Robert wanted to bid on a property; he asked Howard whether the property was zoned for
commercial development. Howard said that it was, but Howard was mistaken. There was only
zoning for agricultural use. Robert bought the property at the auction, relying on what Howard
had told him about zoning. But once he discovered that he could not use the property for
commercial purposes, he refused to pay for the property.
Can Peter enforce his contract with Robert?
Question Two
Susan and Joyce were both accountants carrying on business as sole proprietors. They
decided to enter into an arrangement that would reduce their expenses. i. they rented premises consisting of three offices and a reception area, where they both could
practice. Each signed the lease as a tenant.
ii. They hired a secretary to work for both of them.
iii. They will each contribute equally to the office expenses
iv. Apart from those shared expenses, all expenses are the responsibility of the person incurring
them
v. All decisions regarding management of the office such as the salary of the shared secretary
require the consent of both Susan and Joyce.
vi. Each will bill and be exclusively entitled to the fees received in return for their own work.
Is this a partnership? To be certain, what other information would you need?
-
Rating:
/5
Solution: LAW2003 Assignment #2