Contents

• N/A

Description

This paper answers the following questions on Singapore law –
Question 1
Mason was walking home along Geylang Ave 10 when a stranger approached him. The stranger introduced himself as Jaws, the “friendly neighbourhood financial planner.” Facing financial difficulties, Mason was interested to hear out what Jaws had to offer. Jaws was willing to loan Mason $10,000 at a monthly interest rate of 5%. Jaws claimed that it was, “better than the local banks by 1% (unsaid, 1% per annum).”
Hearing that it was such a good offer, Mason decided to take up the loan. He signed on all the necessary contractual documents and walked away with $9,500 cash, with $500 as its first payment to Jaws for interest.
In the meanwhile Jaws is convicted and sentenced to an imprisonment term for having conducted moneylending business at Geylang Avenue 10 without a valid licence. Upon his release from prison Jaws went to Mason’s home for the collection of his loan. Mason refused to pay any money, claiming that after attending his Contract Law classes in UniSIM, he came to realize that there is no valid contract as there was a presence of vitiating factor - mistake. Advise Mason.
Question 2
Sharon places a sign in the window of his black Porsche which reads, “For Sale - $50,000 only! Normal price - $400,000! Low mileage, 2008 model – full service history and records available.” In response to the notice, Kevin speaks to Sharon about the car. Kevin tells Sharon that he intends to buy the car for his wife and new born son. After examining the car and its service history and records, Kevin purchased it from Sharon for $50,000.
Within the next few weeks, Kevin spent an additional $8,000 retrofitting the interiors of the car. 2 months later, Kevin saw an old copy of newspaper, featuring a picture of his Porsche in connection with a serial murderer. It transpired that the previous owner of the vehicle before was the serial killer who hid the bodies of his victims in the car. It was also discovered that the car was a 2007 model. Once the background of the car was known, Kevin’s wife refused to go into the vehicle. She claimed that it is not “healthy” for their new born son to be in the car.
While Sharon knew of the car’s history, she said nothing of this to Kevin. Kevin felt that there was a breach of contract and wants to seek legal remedies. Advise Kevin.
Question 3
May was a Director for a private school – Institute of Commerce. Part of her job was to source for the purchase of a piece land for the school. A few weeks later, May finds a plot of land in Serangoon suitable for the school’s development. Acting as an agent on behalf of the school, she bought the land at an inflated price of $900,000. Unknown to the school and its Board of Directors, May had pocketed $200,000 of commission over the land sale. She had also failed to disclose that the land was purchased from her husband, Mason.
A few days prior to the sale of land to the Institute of Commerce, Mason actually transacted with the original land owner and bought the Serangoon plot of land for $400,000.
When the Institute of Commerce discovered of Mason’s role in the transaction, they felt that May was in breach of her contractual duties as an agent and director of her office. Advise May.