The Australian Tort And Contract Law Essay

Question:

Discuss about the Australian Tort and Contract Law.

Answer:

Introduction

The Australian Tort and Contract Law have been established in order to minimize the possibilities of disputes and to eradicate the issues in proper legislation and help rendering justice to the victims. In order to have a clear idea about the fundamentals of the Australian Tort and Contract Law, the case study provided has been taken into consideration to help in better understanding. This report deals with issues of contract infringement and sheer negligence resulting in financial loss, its legal consequences and the solutions that can be adopted to eradicate the crisis. The purpose of this report is to analyze a legal business issue, the relevant law and recommend a solution, with reference to Australian Tort and Contact Law.

Tort law and Contract law

Australian Tort Law has been formulated with a combination of a set of laws that are based on common legal principles and legislative actions. Not similar to that of breach of contracts, Tort Law is not directly dependent on any agreement between two clients or lawsuit (Abraham, 2017). Just like any legal criminal judgment that is implemented by the government, Australian Tort Law actions are brought up civilians in case of any tortuous action that includes financial compensation, damage compensation and injunctions (Epstein & Sharkey, 2016). Tort law as incorporated under the Australian Legislation, unlike any other administrative prosecution, do not involve in paying any compensation to the courts (Goldberg, Sebok & Zipursky, 2016).

Contract law as enforced under Australian Legislation refers to the voluntary agreement between two or more participants in terms of performing any service (Hillman, 2012). This is legally enforced by law bound by certain terms and conditions, breaching of which can result in legal intervention (Knapp, Crystal & Prince, 2016).

According to the case study, Ellen has a strong ground of filing a case against the council for misguiding her. The council was equally responsible for employment of such an officer who did not have the minimum responsibility to study or understand the query of the client before offering a solution or assuring. Even though the council worker had other issues to resolve, it should have been considered that all the cases and clients are equally important.

The council worker was an official worker of the office who had been appointed to look after the grievances and doubts of the clients and in the process of attaining one issue, he failed to attend another important issue that resulted in the financial loss and a threat to the career as well. The council worker knowingly or unknowingly performed a tortious act.

In short, the act that is caused due to negligence and injures someone financially is classified under the Tort Act, according to the Australian Legislation. The council worker was an official employee and failed to execute his duty dedicatedly and in this manner, he even breached his contract with the council and considerably fell under the Contract Law (Chen-Wishart, 2012).

Contract Law

As per the case study, Ellen officially entered into an agreement with the owner of the house to run her business of setting up a meditation studio and due to the misinformation provided by the council worker, she failed to run her business, since the business needed a calm and quiet environment and jeopardized her career. As per the Australian Contract Law, Ellen signed the agreement for a lease of one year and due to the failing in the business, she unfortunately failed to pay the rent on time, according to the contract. The owner of the land can probably file a case against Ellen under Contract Law as per the Australian Legislation for breaching of the contract that was signed between him and Ellen, while taking the lease of the terrace (McKendrick, 2014). Although this was not at the fault of Ellen since she had a different perspective about the business along the studio set up and she completely relied on the assurance by the council worker, which proved to be disastrous for Ellen, her health, business, career and financial stability.

Tort of negligence

The council worker is the primary reason that was responsible for all the chain reaction, resulting in the losses. The council worker had an urgency to resolve another issue and in this turn, he recklessly overlooked the main requirement of the enquiry that came to him previously and misinformed the client that resulted in the financial loss of the client who deliberately failed to set up a successful business. In this matter, Ellen can file against the council worker under the Australian Tort law for allegedly neglecting the priority and gravity if the enquiry that resulted in the financial injury of the client and making her breach a law that was equally penalizing. Ellen can file against the worker to compensate for the loss that was incurred by both Ellen and the landowner for the breaching of the Contract Law (Poole, 2012).

Conclusion

With the help of this report, it is clear that Ellen was not at all responsible for the breaching of the Contract law that was signed in between her and the landowner. Ellen had to pay the price of setting up a meditation studio under the misguidance of the council worker and alleged broke a law due to the inability to pay the allotted rent, due to her sinking business. The negligence of the council worker made Ellen suffer mentally, financially, her career was in stake and made her break a law, which she did not anticipate. Ellen can be filed against under the Australian Contract Law by the landowner for the breaching of the contract and Ellen in turn can file against the council worker under the Australian Tort Law for sheer negligence in advice that resulted in financial injury causing further damage to the reputation as well. As per the Australian Legislation, the council worker is liable to pay compensation to Ellen for advising irresponsibly and in turn making her face legal convictions for breaching of contract.

References

Abraham, K. (2017). The forms and functions of tort law. West Academic.

Chen-Wishart, M. (2012). Contract law. Oxford University Press. Goldberg, J. C., Sebok, A. J., & Zipursky, B. C. (2016). Tort Law: Responsibilities and Redress. Wolters Kluwer law & business.

Epstein, R. A., & Sharkey, C. M. (2016). Cases and materials on torts. Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.

Hillman, R. A. (2012). The richness of contract law: an analysis and critique of contemporary theories of contract law (Vol. 28). Springer Science & Business Media.

Knapp, C. L., Crystal, N. M., & Prince, H. G. (2016). Problems in Contract Law: cases and materials. Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.

McKendrick, E. (2014). Contract law: text, cases, and materials. Oxford University Press (UK).

Poole, J. (2012). Casebook on contract law. Oxford University Press.

How to cite this essay: