how did everyone go?
i think i went decent for the amount of time i put into it.
q1- thanks to skittled for typing up the objectives, i had all my prepared answers there (but 1). a simple copy out.
q2- here is what i did. whole argument thru was saying that alex terminated the contract by lack of peformance and breach of a term. therefore sue can seek a remedy thru equity(restitution - quantm meirut) and also common law(damages). i chose equity since you can decide upon the amount thu quantm meirut over damages. but then in conclusion stated that it was all based on the assumption that there was a valid contract in the first place. wrote something about intention and agreements in a commercial setting (legal relations intended) plenty of cases included with descriptions to strengthen my case.
q3- question on whether it was a contract document or receipt. whether it needs to be signed. whether it needs to be read or not. *something else i am sure*. finally in conclusion say that sharon(what the fuck was her name?) could perhaps sue for negligence as the exemption clause didnt exclude mr. ho from negligence problems.
q4- helpful in law actions, dissolutions (esp on breach of conract term) and if there is no written agreement on dispostiong of assets, then the parnership act applies, which the partners may not want. *include bullshit expansion of each point* what clauses to inclue: restriction of trade, give competitors info for money, and a performance clause, think of the company rather than yourself. thats when i ran out of time.
oh well, i *think* i went pretty decent. how ya'll go?
edit: time for another power nap!
