An idea for a thread...

MrPudding

Would anyone be interested in starting a legal problem question thread? In the course of my studies I, and everyone else studying law, have come across some interesting problem questions and I think it might be interesting to have a thread where we can post them and generate some discussion.

Perhaps, if there was enough interest we could have a kind of online moot that just used written submissions?

Just a couple of ideas to perhaps try and boost the amount of legal discussion in a nice safe theoretical way.

MrP

Tom Young

Yeh, we tried this before and it didn't really work. I think if you want to give it a go, I can set up a 'sticky' and we can see what happens?

Typically, new posters or those lazy arses in a blind panic to get data just scatter gun the forum anyway without bothering to check or search for answers. God forbid they'd read a book also!

eagle_&_bear

Tom Young wrote: »

God forbid they'd read a book also!

undergraduate academic blasphemy :P. you're not expecting undergrads to actually open the books are you? I mean isnt that what nutshells and ELTs are for?

Though, I'd be up for helping/responding

MrPudding

eagle_&_bear wrote: »

undergraduate academic blasphemy :P. you're not expecting undergrads to actually open the books are you? I mean isnt that what nutshells and ELTs are for?

Though, I'd be up for helping/responding

Books? :eek:

I will perhaps give it a go this evening and see what happens...

MrP

NatWW

Hey MrPudding,

Are you still up for it? I think it was a good idea...

Not too sure I'll be able to contribute/help much because I've only started studying law recently (and in quite a limited scope -doing IILEX diploma) but I would be interested in seeing such a thread up and running.

Hope I'm not the only one...

Might try and think of a couple interesting problem questions myself...

Cheers,
Nat

MrPudding

I intend to give it a go, but I have been caught up in my work and also preparing for a moot. I am doing my degree partime so spare time can be a problem.

I will hopefully get a chance to post a contract problem question up this evening.

MrP

NatWW

Sure, there's no hurry MrPudding...

I know the feeling, I'm also doing my degree part-time while working from home as a freelancer and trying to raise a 6-month old baby. It's quite challenging!

Good luck with the moot.

Nat

MrPudding

Ha, I see your one child and raise you 3!

It is very tough going. I am a freelancer myself, but my current contract means I an onsite for 35 hours per week plus overtime...

It will be worth it in the end... I hope.

MrP

evercloserunion

I like the idea, like an open source approach to legal problems.

Maybe only have certain people like mods choosing the problems to stop people posting up their homework or looking for free legal advice.

MrPudding

So here is the problem question from my last Contract assignment:

Lorna is a producer of historical films. She needed a helicopter to provide her with some aerial views of Oxfordshire so she hired Mike to fly his helicopter to the locations she had specified for a fee of £500. When she arrived to meet the helicopter on landing and collect the film she discovered that Mike had taken Ned for the ride. On questioning Ned, Lorna discovered that he had earlier hired Mike to give him an hour long tour of Oxfordshire for £300. Lorna thinks it is unfair that Mike is being paid twice for the same trip.
Lorna has produced a film on DVD about Saxon. She made a contract with the National Museum whereby she would receive 50% of the proceeds from any of sale of the DVDs in their museum shop. The museum then indicated that the DVD was not selling well so they proposed to stop carrying it in their shop. Lorna agreed with the museum to waive her right to payment for the DVD. After a documentary on the BBC about Saxon glassware, Lorna’s DVD is now selling very well and Lorna would like to have some of the profits.
Lorna had, as a hobby, written and produced a historical drama concerning the 18th Century occupants of a house in Bedfordshire. She sent the master copy of the production to the trustees of the house saying they could have it if they wished. The trustees wrote back and told Lorna they liked her film and would pay her half the profits when they sold it in their shop. They have sold £2000 worth of copies of the film but not paid anything to Lorna.
Advise Lorna

NatWW

Well MrPudding,

Unfortunately, I don't think my contribution to this particular problem question will be brilliant as I haven't studied Contrat yet.

So, I'm a bit at a loss here at the moment...

What did you advise Lorna?

Also, maybe a new thread should be created for this, something called Mooting or Problem Questions (sticky thread maybe?)

Wdyt? Just saying this because I think it could maximise thread exposure, else this thread will rapidly land on page 2...

Nat

MrPudding

NatWW wrote: »

Well MrPudding,

Unfortunately, I don't think my contribution to this particular problem question will be brilliant as I haven't studied Contrat yet.

So, I'm a bit at a loss here at the moment...

What did you advise Lorna?

Also, maybe a new thread should be created for this, something called Mooting or Problem Questions (sticky thread maybe?)

Wdyt? Just saying this because I think it could maximise thread exposure, else this thread will rapidly land on page 2...

Nat

I will post a tort one when I get a chance, they are the two subjects I am doing at the moment.

As for my advice to Lorna:

Part one:
In Lorna’s case it would appear that, whilst she may feel Mike’s actions are unfair, she has no basis in law to complain and her promise to pay is enforceable.
Part two:
Her promise to accept less may not be enforceable. It might be possible for museum to argue promissory estoppal, though the facts are rather vague. If they do successfully argue it she can give notice of her intention to assert her contractual rights, after a reasonable notice. If they can't argue it then the original terms apply.

Part Three:
No good consideration. The film is past consideration. She performed before the promise was made and therefore cannot use it as consideration to enforce the promise.

I wrote slight more in the assignment, but that is the gist.

MrP