According to the sec- 3 & 4 of the Contracts Act 1950, Calvin made a contract with Joash, his son (McKendrick 2014). They made the contract in a settle understanding between them. Joash was concerned at time of making that contract. According to sec- 10, 11, 12, 13 & 14 of the the Contracts Act 1950 he cover all the valid purposes of making the contract between them (Barker 2014). It was a valid contract. However, after some year Joash breach the contract that he made with father. He refused to get married. According the sec - 39 he refuse to accept the offer after some year. The sec-40 of the the Contracts Act 1950 also applicable in this case. Joash breach the contract wholly so Calvin has rights to terminate the contract (Turner2014).
According to the sec – 74 of the Contracts Act 1950 that the person who breaches the contract and the party who suffers the damage can claim compensation from the first party. Sec 74 also defines that second party who suffered for the loss; he must claim the amount or compensation from first party. According to the sec – 75 the aggrieved party who breach the contract gave the penalty who suffered the loss or damage.
In the case of Merritt v Merritt  EWCA Civ 6 it was held by the court that all domestic agreements cannot be disregarded as contract. In the famous case of Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company  EWCA Civ 1 the court held that if the party was inducted into the offer and as a result fulfilled the consideration a legally binding contract exists between the parties.
Calvin is the Chief Executive Officer of the Mazda which a company of car manufacturer. He promised his son Joash that he will give him one of his Mazda car according some condition. He told his son that if he get married then he will only get that car and also Joash need to leave his job in ABC where he work as a Sales Executive for assist his father in the family business. Joash accepted that condition. Here one proposal have given to him and accepting that makes a valid contract (Poole 2016). According to sections - 10, 11, 12, 13 & 14 of the the Contracts Act 1950 he covers all the purposes of a valid contract. However, after some years he breaches the contact and refuse to keep the promise. It is a case of breach of contact. The sec 74 of the Contracts Act 1950 defines the damages or loss of the suffered party and sec-75 defines the penalty for breaching the contract (Chen-Wishart ,Loke and Ong 2016).
According the case study, Joash and Calvin made a valid contract according the Contracts Act 1950 of Malaysia. However, Joash also breach that contract also.
McKendrick, E., 2014. Contract law: text, cases, and materials. Oxford University Press (UK).
Hughes, W., Champion, R. and Murdoch, J., 2015. Construction contracts: law and management. Routledge.
Barker, D., 2014. Law made simple. Routledge.
Poole, J., 2016. Textbook on contract law. Oxford University Press.
Chen-Wishart, M., Loke, A. and Ong, B. eds., 2016. Studies in the Contract Laws of Asia: Remedies for Breach of Contract. Oxford University Press.
Turner, C., 2014. Key Cases: Contract Law. Routledge.