Hi everyone, I am a first year Law Student at university and have decided to enter the mooting competition. After reading the first question I was hoping to be drawn as the respondent (because I thought this would be the easier to find cases for) but suprise suprise, I am representing the appellant.

I was hoping that if I post the question here someone might be able to point me in the direction of a few relevant cases to help support my argument. The question is as follows:


The appellant was waiting at a bus stop in London. The bus arrived, she boarded and sat down. The bus moved off. The conductor arrived but rejected her money for the fare because he believed her to be intoxicated and then told her to leave. Upon leaving her seat the appellant slipped on the wet floor and sprained her ankle. She is claiming breach of contract because the bus company should have made sure the floor was not slippy. The company accepts she was sober, however, they argue there was no contract and that there was a large warning at the front saying the floor gets slippy and that they accept no liability.


Personally I do not think there is a contract and as such am finding it hard to find cases arguing otherwise so any help would be much appreciated.

I loved mooting!

Parker v. South Eastern Railway Co. (comments of ...Lord Denning)
Olley v. Marlborough Court Ltd. 1940 something
Occupier Liability Act 1984!!!

Just of the top of my head...

Argue the contract had been made when she sat on the bus...Offer = the bus stopped. Acceptance = she sat down...Voila we have a contract...now you just have to deal with the consideration point!

"djd585" wrote in message
...

Hi everyone, I am a first year Law Student at university and have
decided to enter the mooting competition. After reading the first
question I was hoping to be drawn as the respondent (because I thought
this would be the easier to find cases for) but suprise suprise, I am
representing the appellant.

I was hoping that if I post the question here someone might be able to
point me in the direction of a few relevant cases to help support my
argument. The question is as follows:


The appellant was waiting at a bus stop in London. The bus arrived,
she boarded and sat down. The bus moved off. The conductor arrived
but rejected her money for the fare because he believed her to be
intoxicated and then told her to leave. Upon leaving her seat the
appellant slipped on the wet floor and sprained her ankle. She is
claiming breach of contract because the bus company should have made
sure the floor was not slippy. The company accepts she was sober,
however, they argue there was no contract and that there was a large
warning at the front saying the floor gets slippy and that they accept
no liability.


Personally I do not think there is a contract and as such am finding it
hard to find cases arguing otherwise so any help would be much
appreciated.

I think I agree that there was no contract. In real life, nobody would run
that as a breach of contract case. It would be run as a negligence case. The
claimant wouldn't have a hope of establishing liability unless there was a
spillage of something slippery (ie, water trodden into the bus is plainly an
inevitable hazard) in which case arguably the conductor should have made the
floor safe or taken the bus out of service. On that basis I suppose the only
relevant case I can think of is Ward v Tesco, and you'd argue that if it is
accepted that the claimant did in fact slip, the burden is on the defendant
to prove that there was a reasonable system of inspection.

I suppose for the purpose of a moot (and I've never been involved in such a
thing) one could argue that by entering the bus and proffering her fare she
was accepting an invitation to treat (the invitation being the bus stopping
at the bus stop) and by rejecting her fare and ordering her off the bus, the
conductor was in breach of contract. But regardless of whether a contract
was formed it is beyond doubt that they owed her a duty of care because they
invited her, and any other waiting passengers, onto the bus. The Occupiers
Liability Act would apply.

But nevertheless, I don't think in real life any solicitor would take on
such a case.

"djd585" wrote in message
...

Hi everyone, I am a first year Law Student at university and have
decided to enter the mooting competition. After reading the first
question I was hoping to be drawn as the respondent (because I thought
this would be the easier to find cases for) but suprise suprise, I am
representing the appellant.

I was hoping that if I post the question here someone might be able to
point me in the direction of a few relevant cases to help support my
argument. The question is as follows:


The appellant was waiting at a bus stop in London. The bus arrived,
she boarded and sat down. The bus moved off. The conductor arrived
but rejected her money for the fare because he believed her to be
intoxicated and then told her to leave. Upon leaving her seat the
appellant slipped on the wet floor and sprained her ankle. She is
claiming breach of contract because the bus company should have made
sure the floor was not slippy. The company accepts she was sober,
however, they argue there was no contract and that there was a large
warning at the front saying the floor gets slippy and that they accept
no liability.


Personally I do not think there is a contract and as such am finding it
hard to find cases arguing otherwise so any help would be much
appreciated.




--
djd585

October again and first year law students post their assignments on here...

R. Mark Clayton wrote:
"djd585" wrote in message
...

Hi everyone, I am a first year Law Student at university and have
decided to enter the mooting competition. After reading the first
question I was hoping to be drawn as the respondent (because I
thought this would be the easier to find cases for) but suprise
suprise, I am representing the appellant.

I was hoping that if I post the question here someone might be able
to point me in the direction of a few relevant cases to help support
my argument. The question is as follows:


The appellant was waiting at a bus stop in London. The bus arrived,
she boarded and sat down. The bus moved off. The conductor arrived
but rejected her money for the fare because he believed her to be
intoxicated and then told her to leave. Upon leaving her seat the
appellant slipped on the wet floor and sprained her ankle. She is
claiming breach of contract because the bus company should have made
sure the floor was not slippy. The company accepts she was sober,
however, they argue there was no contract and that there was a large
warning at the front saying the floor gets slippy and that they
accept no liability.


Personally I do not think there is a contract and as such am finding
it hard to find cases arguing otherwise so any help would be much
appreciated.




--
djd585

October again and first year law students post their assignments on
here...

It's refreshing though for one of them to be quite so candid

--
Joe Lee

I got a moot coming up in a few weeks,

Thought you might have some interestign arguments for this one:

im the respondent

Dave (Appellant)
-v-
Emma (Respondent)

Emma has just bought “The Village Shop” and, anxious to please the locals, decides to put an advertisement in the local paper stating that she will sell boxes of luxury chocolate shortbread at a discount price of £2.50, instead of the recommended retail price of £5.00. It also states that there are only 50 boxes available.

Emma has recently bought a computer from her son, to help her with the running of the shop. The advertisement states that anyone wanting
the shortbread should contact Emma in person at the shop or E-mail her at
.

The advertisement appears in the local paper on Saturday.
Dave sees the advertisement at 4.30pm on the Saturday afternoon and immediately sends an Email to Emma ordering six boxes of the Shortbread.

The E-mail is received on Emma's machine at 5.09pm on the Saturday.
On Saturday evening Emma realises that the discount was too generous as she is making no money on the shortbread and people are not coming to the shop and buying lots of other groceries as she had hoped.

She phones the local paper asking them to put notice in the next
day informing people that the discount price is no longer available.

The Sunday paper is published at 9am on Sunday morning and it is delivered to Dave at 10.30am.
Emma opens for business at 10.00am on the Sunday. She reads Dave's E-mail at 10.35am, but refuses to sell him the shortbread. She replies stating that the discount is no longer available.

Dave sued Emma for breach of contract but at first instance the judge found for Viv on the following basis:

(A) There was no contact between Emma and Dave since the notice in the paper was not an offer but invitation to treat; and

(B) Even if the notice did amount to an offer it was withdrawn before acceptance applying the principle enunciated in Entores Ltd v Miles Far East Corporation [1955] 2 QB 327.