Category: Law

Discuss whether there was a breach of contract in this case. What are the implications of MPC’s warehouse being destroyed by lightning?

LEGL210 Writing Assignment #2

Did Blaze and Eliza enter into a legally binding contract? Discuss the validity of the contract by exploring the following concepts and applying to the facts of the case (30 points):
Offer and Acceptance
Consideration
Capacity
Statute of Frauds

Discuss whether there was a breach of contract in this case. What are the
implications of MPC’s warehouse being destroyed by lightning? (20 points)

Discuss how the contract between Blaze and Eliza was discharged and explain which legal remedies might be available in this case and why they are applicable here. (20 points)

 Identify and explain the meaning and requirements of the concept of certainty of intention. Identify and explain the meaning and requirements of the concept of a charitable trust.

Law problem based question

Identify and explain the meaning and requirements of the concept of certainty of intention.

Identify and explain the meaning and requirements of the concept of a charitable trust.

Identify and explain the means of control and supervision of a charitable trust.

Identify and explain the meaning and requirements of the concept of certainty of objects.

Critically analyse and evaluate these concepts and requirements, while applying them to the factual scenario of a question.

Critically analyse the wording of a legal document and identify the legal issues which are raised by that wording.

 Identify the federal law (or laws) that would be waived by the specific waiver on which the ACO and its participants intend to rely. Explain what is prohibited by that law (or laws), and explain how the proposal could violate that law (or laws) in the absence of a waiver.

Identify the federal law (or laws) that would be waived by the specific waiver on which the ACO and its participants intend to rely. Explain what is prohibited by that law (or laws), and explain how the proposal could violate that law (or laws) in the absence of a waiver.

Summarize the requirements that must be met to qualify for the specific waiver.

Analyze whether the proposal meets all of the requirements for the specific waiver. State the arguments (if any) for concluding that the proposal meets all of those requirements, as well as the arguments (if any) for concluding that the proposal does not meet them. Be sure to state your conclusion and explain the basis for it.

As a matter of policy, explain whether you think that the requirements for that specific waiver should be changed by the secretary of HHS. Specifically, should the secretary amend the requirements for that specific waiver to balance the goal of beneficiary

Perhaps a comparative approach of 2 Member States in their implementation of this principle?Discuss

 

Is it possible that deviation from assessments by competent authorities can be a violation of these Member States not implementing and upholding their obligation to article 4 of ECHR. If these national courts took a human rights approach to the assessments article 4 can be protected.

Perhaps a comparative approach of 2 Member States in their implementation of this principle?Discuss

 Explain what it means for a research study to be justified and grounded in the literature; then, explain what it means for a problem to be original.

use of literature and problem statements

Evaluate the authors’ use of literature.

Evaluate the research problem.

Explain what it means for a research study to be justified and grounded in the literature; then, explain what it means for a problem to be original.

Critically examine the above statement with reference to the relevant authorities.

Law Of Tort

Critically examine the above statement with reference to the relevant authorities.

Make Sure you use oscola refrences.

Mention these cases in the coursework please

Hill V Chief Constable w.yorks 1989 ac 53

Osman v ferguson 1993 4 all er 344 and Osman v Uk (1999) 1 FLR 193

Swinney v chief constable northuumbria 1997 qb 464 1999 4 wluk160

Brooks v commissioner of police for the metropolis 2005 ukhl 24

Van colle v chief constable of Hertfordshire and smith v chief constable of Sussex, 2008 ukhl 50

Speak about negligence duty of care

Negligence breach of duty
Negligence causation
Negligence remoteness
And special duty situations: public body liabilities

Contributory negligence/ relevant case here froom v butcher

And the other 2 respective ones.

Do mention important cases aswell please and the structure of duty of care such as the steps needed

Other important cases you should include are:

corr v ibc vehicles 2008

Reeves v met police commissioner

hughes v lord advocate 1961

 Consider your knowledge base of information pertaining to employment law prior to the start of this course. Identify one area in which you feel you have gained the most insight and how it will assist you in the future.

Unit 8 Discussion Question

Consider your knowledge base of information pertaining to employment law prior to the start of this course. Identify one area in which you feel you have gained the most insight and how it will assist you in the future.

Based on what you learned in this course, if you could give one piece of job advice to a new HR representative on how best to handle their new responsibilities, what would it be?