Bob is a builder who specialises in managing large construction projects. He has numerous construction projects underway in various parts of the ACT and has enough work to keep his business going for another 5 years. Bob has always engaged other firms to Essay Example
Legal analysis 4
Legal problem solving
It is fundamentally very important in any legal approach of a legal problem to understand four basic compositions of the problem at hand. IRAC is a process that many laws have put into use whenever they are presented with a legal problem in a court of law. This very important process cannot be overemphasized. Most importantly, the process helps to reduce the complexness of the law and make it appear as if it was a simple equation. Just to expound a little on this process, I stands for ISSUE; this refers to the facts and circumstances that present themselves controversially and which makes the parties involved feel that they require legal intervention to bring them at par with each other. R stands for RULE; these are the legal provisions that govern the controversial issue at hand. It represents the legal point of view at which the parties’ can be judged. A stands for APPLICATION; this applies to the legal representative of the two parties where by the representative analysis the rule as per the facts or circumstances at hand for their application in ruling. C Stands for CONCLUSION where the legal representatives analyze how the courts holding may modify the rule. (Butt, 2004)
According to the agreement made between Bob and Con, it is clear that Con was supposed to supply Bob with concrete as from the agreed date. It is therefore his responsibility to ensure that he makes the necessary preparations so that he ensures that the concrete is delivered as agreed immediately. Before applying for the tender he should have know that he would need to fit his tracks with these special equipments as he terms it. He should therefore have considered the amount of time available, and whether this time will be ample to fix the equipment and enable him to commence with the delivery process. Once these calculations were made, he should have been in a position to know whether he would manage to take the tender. On the other hand, Bob allowed to give the concrete tender to his little brother on the basis of financial gain since Con was apparently the lowest bidder among the tenders that Bob received. It seems that he never considered the quality of the bidder and therefore he was deceived by the fact that there was a financially considerate bidder. However, this never happened, Bob gave the tender to Con, and later Con informs him that it is not his fault but he was not in a position to supply the concrete as agreed. Having spent $500,000 to pay for the fitting of special equipment to his fleet of 10 trucks and bearing in mind that he only paid for this amount because of Bobs tender, he would not possibly see him deny him the tender at the expense another company i.e. Jimbo. (Moore, 2009)
It is important to understand that tendering is process governed by law. The process precedes contractual relationships. Bob should realize that it is his right by law that Con should deliver the amount of concrete agreed and as per the period running within the specified period of five years. However, he should also realize that he has no power to take away the tender from Con just like that. Con also has a right to retain the tender particularly considering that it is not his fault to dishonor the agreement that was made. However, if upon approval by a court of law that there has been a bleach of contract by Con, then the tender can be lifted from him. (Moore, 2009)
In this case, there is no clear indication of failure to honor the agreement by Con. The one-week delay can be expected in any tender delivery particularly given that it is due to unavoidable circumstances. Bob cannot be sure whether it would have been the same case with Jimbo if in any case the company had won the tender. Considering the time that Con will delay the delivery of the tender, one week should be agreeable. In doing so, one has to consider the type of goods in the deal (concrete) and bearing in mind that it was to be used in construction project, anyone can agree with me that one-week delay in delivery has no much significance in the project progress. (Butt, 2004)
In conclusion, Bob should be considerate and allow Con to continue with the order upon completion of the preparation of his fleet of trucks. It would be a bleach of contract if he goes ahead to deny Con to continue with the tender. Also in any big project as the one Bob is having, there is always some time set aside to cater for the problems that may arise in project implementation that can affect the project cycle. It is therefore wise for both parties to sit down and assess the problems that may arise due to delay in concrete delivery, and if possible come up with the best way possible to compensate for the same.
Butt, P. J. (2004). Butterworths Concise Australian Legal Dictionary: Oxford.
Moore, K. M. (2009). Risk Arbitrage: An Investor’s Guide. New York: Wiley & Sons.
More Important Things