08.04.2020 Views

LAB Case

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

CONTRACTS AND FINALITY OF SIGNATURE:

COYS OF KENSINGTON AUTOMOBILES LTD

VS

TIZIANA PUGLIESE

BY GROUP 3


CASE FACTS


COYS OF KENSINGTON AUTOMOBILES LTD

●Specialised in auction of bidding classic

motor cars based in England

●Conducted an auction in Monaco

●Had given two options to register for the

auction -

Site bidding

Telephone bidding

●Registration forms were different in both the

cases


TIZIANA PUGLIESE

●An Italian national visiting Monaco

●Submitted the telephone registration form for the

Kensington auction

●Bid for Bentley on the day of auction over phone

●Was the highest bidder and awarded the contract

on June 12 th ,2019

●Did not pay for the contract claiming she did not

participate in the auction


Learnings from L’Estrange v F Graucob, Ltd

● If a party has signed a document

containing contractual terms , it is

objectively presumed that they

understand the terms.

●This implies that the party can not say

that they did not read the terms of the

contract.

●A contract in writing is formed when a

signed offer is accepted by any modality

of communication.


Contentions raised

by Tiziana Pugliese


Contention 1 – Incorporation of Catalogue

She was unaware of the catalogue and conditions of the auction.

COURT’S RESPONSE -

The form of the auction referred to the Conditions of Business

printed in the catalogue. Such a reference is sufficient for there

to be consensus and there is no need for actual terms to be in

the possession of Tiziana.


Contention 2 – Foreign Language and Incomprehension

She could not understand the relevant terms sufficiently as she had almost

no understanding of written or spoken English.

COURT’S RESPONSE -

• The court did not consider this as the strong argument as

she was able fill the lot number and the description of the

Car in English.

• It further stated that under such circumstances she cannot

avoid the consequences by saying that she did not read or

understand the conditions written in English.


Telephone

Registration

Form

Source - Annexure of Coys and

Kensington Automobile Ltd.


Contention 3 - Signing at the wrong place

Last line reads,

“ All bid shall be treated as offers made within the ‘Conditions of

business’ and ‘Important Notice’ printed in the catalogue.”

• Tiziana proclaimed that the signature was not under or near any

relevant content of the Form.

• The Form also lacked enforcement or binding words like, “ I agree to

abide by the terms.” Hence she claimed that her signature cannot

be equated to her concurrence to the terms.


COURT’S TAKE ON THE CONTENTION

● The court rejected the validity of misunderstanding the purpose of the

signature.

● It held the importance of signing a form above the position and the

misinterpretation.

● The court also finds her signature as a direct acknowledgement to the

terms stated in the form.

● Though the wordings could have been more lucid, the fact that she

completed the table below the signature, stands as a testament to the

interpretation.

● Small and gibberish content and the absence of unusual consensus

overrides the absence of signpost.


LEARNINGS FROM THE CASE: Coys of Kensington Automobiles

limited V Tiziana Pugliese

●Signing means concurrence with what the terms state

●To make a contract in writing, offer- writing & signed, accept- any modality

●Unfamiliarity with a language- Irrelevant

●Not signing at the correct place- Irrelevant

●However, a contract can be set aside if the contract is induced by fraud or

misrepresentation


Thank you.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!