Derive from arbitration’s dispute settlement principles, arbitration shows many pros and brings many benefits for parties
in commercial dispute, specifically as follows:
1. Friendly helping to preserve a friendly relationship between disputants.
2. different from the court procedure which is stipulated in Civil Procedural Code 2015, to settle civil dispute cases in all
kinds of civil relations, arbitration procedures are tailored for commercial disputes to be more applicable. The arbitral
award is only 1 and final. Arbitration is only resolved once (intermediate) → shortening time and cost compared to
court proceedings
3. Speedy: Cases are generally resolved in months, not years. Generally, the entire arbitration process from beginning to
end takes less than 6-12 months.
Parties are facilitated with more autonomy with regards to procedural matters such as time, place, language, governing
laws, etc. Moreover, normally, parties choosing arbitration do not have to go through different levels of adjudication, as in
the national court system, which helps to save time and money for both side.
4. the right to choose arbitrators to resolve the dispute gives parties the opportunity to select experts with suitable
expertise and practical experience to the nature of dispute (insurance, construction, finance, intellectual property, etc). It
helps to considerably improve the quality of dispute resolution in comparision with the option of administrative
assigment of jugdes at the court.
5. the entire arbitration process will be kept confidential. Unlike in State Court, arbitration hearing will not be held
publicly, therefore, parties can protect and preserve their branding/ reputation. Nowadays, confidentiality is growing
attention in the context where financial problems are sensitive and can create great impact, either good and bad, toward
entrepreneurs, especially joint stock company.
5. arbitral tribunal’s jurisdiction derives from parties’ agreement in which is empowered by but not dependent on state
power. As a result, arbitration could be flexible in its own way (allows using foreign languages, foreign laws, etc.) and
most suitable to disputes with foreign factors.
6. arbitral award are legally enforceable as court verdict. The disputing parties have the right to request the
competent state agency to enforce the arbitral award
Within Vietnam’s territories, VIAC arbitral awards might be sent directly to enforcement agencies (Department of Civil
Judgment Enforcement) to be enforced legally.
VIAC arbitral awards also might be recognized and enforced in more than 150 countries and territories which are
Contracting State of New York Convention 1958 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards.
Xuất phát từ những nguyên tắc giải quyết tranh chấp của mình thì trọng tài thể hiện rất nhiều ưu điểm vượt trội, mang lại
nhiều lợi ích cho các bên khi có tranh chấp trong hoạt động kinh doanh, thương mại, cụ thể như sau:
Thứ nhất, khác với tố tụng tòa án được quy định tại Bộ luật tố tụng dân sự áp dụng để giải quyết tất cả các vụ việc trong lĩnh
vực dân sự nói chung, thủ tục trọng tài áp dụng cho các tranh chấp trong hoạt động thương mại đơn giản hơn, các bên có
thể chủ động về thời gian, địa điểm giải quyết tranh chấp giúp đẩy nhanh thời gian giải quyết tranh chấp; thủ tục trọng tài
không trải qua nhiều cấp xét xử như ở toà án, cho nên hạn chế tốn kém về thời gian và tiền bạc cho doanh nghiệp.
Thứ hai, việc được quyền lựa chọn trọng tài viên giải quyết tranh chấp cho phép các bên lựa chọn được các chuyên gia có
chuyên môn và kinh nghiệm thực tế về vấn đề tranh chấp, có uy tín trong nghành nghề trở thành trọng tài viên giải quyết
tranh chấp của các bên, đảm bảo chất lượng giải quyết tranh chấp. (tranh chấp bảo hiểm, tranh chấp về cổ phiếu, chứng
khoán; tranh chấp xây dựng,…)
Thứ ba, trọng tài tôn trọng tính bảo mật thông tin (confidentiality) cho toàn bộ quá trình, phiên họp trọng tài cũng được
thực hiện không công khai [khác với nguyên tắc Tòa án xét xử công khai trong tố tụng tòa án], nhờ đó, các bên trong tranh
chấp có thể đảm bảo được uy tín của mình trên thương trường. Ngày nay, tính bảo mật ngày càng được doanh nghiệp chú ý
trong bối cảnh các vấn đề tài chính của doanh hiện nay rất nhạy cảm với các thông tin liên quan tới doanh nghiệp (đặc biệt
là với các công ty đã niêm yết trên sàn giao dịch chứng khoán).
Thứ tư, thẩm quyền của hội đồng trọng tài được thiết lập dựa trên sự tự nguyện thỏa thuận của các bên mà không phụ thuộc
vào quyền lực nhà nước. Mềm dẻo hơn, linh hoạt hơn [cho phép sử dụng tiếng nước ngoài, áp dụng luật nước ngoài,…] phù
hợp để giải quyết các tranh chấp có yếu tố nước ngoài.
Thứ năm, phán quyết của trọng tài có đặc điểm giống như bản án của tòa án đó chính là mang tính chung thẩm và bắt buộc
các bên phải thi hành. Nếu đem thi hành trong lãnh thổ Việt Nam, phán quyết trọng tài VIAC có thể được đưa thẳng tới cơ
quan thi hành án (Cục thi hành án dân sự) để được cưỡng chế thi hành; phán quyết trọng tài VIAC cũng có thể được cho
công nhận và thi hành tại hơn 150 quốc gia và vùng lãnh thổ là thành viên Công ước NewYork về công nhận và cho thi
hành phán quyết trọng tài nước ngoài.
Arbitration: Phương thức được ưa chuộng để giải quyết tranh chấp trong kinh doanh
6 advantages so với court:
●
●
Friendly helping to preserve a friendly relationship between disputants.
much faster, simpler and less expensive
Disputes can be resolved through arbitration much faster, simpler and less expensive than it would take if the parties
resort to court action.
Being contractual in nature, arbitration permits the parties to specify the time and place for hearings. No special form is
required in presenting a demand for arbitration or in responding thereto.
Giữ đc bí mật kd: be confidential arbitral proceedings and an arbitral award are generally non-public, and can
●
be made confidential Arbitration is held in private. Pleadings are confidential except to the parties themselves. Awards
are unpublished.
Parties are free to choose the arbitration tribunal(hội đồng trọng tài): Since the parties are given the
●
opportunity to choose the arbitrator(s), they can designate those whom they deem to be qualified to conduct the
proceedings.
Phán quyết trọng tài là only 1 and final. Trọng tài chỉ giải quyết 1 lần (trung thẩm) → rút ngắn thời gian và chi phí
●
so với tố tụng tòa án FINAL & BINDING EFFECT OF ARBITRATION AWARD
Arbitral tribular được đảm bảo về sự cưỡng chế, có giá trị thực hiện. Các bên tranh chấp có quyền yêu cầu cơ
●
quan nhà nước có thẩm quyền thi hành phán quyết trọng tài
Contract : Chương 10: formation - thiết lập hợp đồng Chương 11: performance - thực hiện hợp đồng
1.
2.
Những yếu tố để một hợp đồng phát sinh hiệu lực (hợp đồng có thể thực hiện được).
Và nếu xảy ra một số yếu tố nào thì có thể làm cho hđ đó ko có giá trị pháp lý và ko thể thực hiện được - defence:
Capacity to the contract: các năng lực của các bên khi giao kết hợp đồng (năng lực của cá nhân- đủ 18 tuổi và
●
nhận thức về hành vi của mình; năng lực đối với pháp nhân - tổ chức được thiết lập phù hợp với quy định của pháp luật)
Có một số bên cung cấp thông tin sai sự thật, hc bỏ qua những thông tin (miss statement… check laik)
●
Thiếu 1 số nội dung→ dẫn tới 1 trong các bên kí kết hợp đồng gây ra thiệt hại
●
Vi phạm do sự cố ý của một bên (thường là các bên có sự ko trung thực trong giao kết hợp đồng)
●
c. Hình thức hợp đồng: thiết lập bằng văn bản; <$10,000: verbal contract
d. Thiết lập hợp đồng
●
Offer: đề nghị hợp đồng và Acceptance: chấp nhận đề nghị → hợp đồng sẽ được giao kết
Anh mỹ: consideration - có sự dịch chuyển về mặt vật chất để chứng minh mk có ý định thiết lập hợp đồng đó (ở
●
VN ko cần)
When was the contract establish? - có đâỳ đủ các yếu tố offer (bên đề nghị ban đầu gửi đi đề nghị), acceptance ( đề
nghị được chấp nhận, lời chấp nhận đó phải tới nơi đề nghị ban đầu → được giao kết established)
Câu hỏi gắn liền với tình huống
Khi thực hiện hợp đồng thì thường sẽ có 1 bên hoặc 2 bên tiến hành những hành vi ảnh hưởng đến lợi ích của
bên kia. VD: ko giao hàng (non-delivery); ko thanh toán tiền (non-payment); giao hàng thiếu; giao hàng không phù hợp
với hợp đồng về mặt chất lượng, số lượng, địa điểm, thời gian giao hàng… (comformerty: sự phù hợp
Những hành vi vi phạm của 1 bên với bên kia mà gây thiệt hại cho bên kia thì sẽ làm cho bên vi phạm đó phải chịu trách
nhiệm → Who wil be held liable for the full amount of the compensation : ai là người đc coi là vi phạm hợp đồng →
phân tích hành vi vi phạm: ko giao hàng (non-delivery); ko thanh toán tiền (non-payment); giao hàng thiếu; giao hàng
không phù hợp với hợp đồng về mặt chất lượng, số lượng, địa điểm, thời gian giao hàng… (incomformerty: sự phù hợp)
→ vi phạm hợp đồng sẽ dẫn tới chế tài: Remedies
có chết tài tiếp tục thực hiện hợp đồng (các bên phải tiếp tục hành vi mà thiếu nó thì ảnh hưởng lợi ích bên kia ●
giao hàng thiếu thì phải giao đủ, giao hàng ko phù hợp về mặt chất lượng thì phải đổi hàng, hc bồi thường thiệt hại với
khoản chênh lệch. Có những khoản bên vi phạm phải bỏ ra để khắc phục những hành vi vi phạm của mình (giao hàng bổ
sung, mua mới để thay thế)
c. Cả hàng hóa và dịch vụ
Mục nào vi phạm nghĩa vụ của bên cung ứng hàng hóa (dịch vụ) → luật thương mại việt nam - commercial law 2005
Bên bán, bên cung ứng dịch vụ, bên tiếp nhận dịch vụ, bên mua hàng → ai là ng vi phạm. Sự vi phạm ấy đc xử lí ntn theo
qđ của luật
Thực hiện hợp đồng: các bên đã giao kết hđ, n0 trong qtrinh thực hiện thì do có những sự kiện xảy ra (ngoài ý muốn; hc
do các bên cố tình thực hiện n0 nó làm ảnh hưởng đến lợi ích của bên kia → vi phạm hđ) → chế tài pháp lý áp dụng với
những hvi vi phạm - ÁP DỤNG LUẬT VIỆT NAM (2005 Law and commerce), who is held to be liable for the contract
violation and give your analysis. : hành vi đấy vi phạm nghĩa vụ trong hđ ntn nào và đưa ra phương án áp dụng luật
+ các bên bị vi phạm có quyền chấm dứt hđ (terminate the contract)
+ ko chấm dứt hợp đồng n0 yêu cầu bên kia tp tục thực hiện hđ nếu sự vi phạm đấy đc coi là ko quan trọng hay là ko cơ
bản → hợp đồng sẽ tiếp tục đc thực hiện
+ nếu hành vi vi phạm là cơ bản hay nghiêm trọng thì hợp đồng có thể bị chấm dứt (termination - to be terminated) →
bên vi phạm hợp đồng sẽ phải bồi thường thiệt hại và chịu các chế tài khác
Chương 18: business organization (hình thức tổ chức kinh doanh của các doanh nghiệp - luật doanh nghiệp)
Có 3 hình thức doanh nghiệp được cho là phổ biến trong kết cấu của nền kinh tế:
1.Doanh nghiệp một chủ - sole trader (VN gọi là doanh nghiệp tư nhân - phổ biến)
Đặc điểm: các cá nhân phải chịu trách nhiệm vô hạn với các khoản nợ của doanh nghiệp bằng toàn bộ tài sản của mình
2.Hợp danh (Partnership): có sự góp vốn và liên kết của 2 hay nhiều hơn các cá nhân, tổ chức để cùng nhau kinh doanh
dưới 1 cái tên và được hưởng lợi ích đem lại từ hoạt động kinh doanh đó. Tuy nhiên, Partnership là 1 hình thức ko được ưa
chuộng ở Việt Nam vì trách nhiệm pháp lý của các thành viên của Partnership thì được coi là vô hạn giống sole trader - nó
còn là trách nhiên liên đới khi mà các thành viên phải chịu trách nhiệm liên đới đối với những sự bất cẩn, hành vi của
những thành viên khác gây ra cho khách hàng của mình→ những thành viên còn lại phải cùng nhau chịu trách nhiệm với
những hậu quả mà do sự vi phạm, sự thiếu hiểu biết của các thành viên hợp danh → ít đc ưu chuộng vì lo các thành viên
của Partnership sẽ phải liên đới chịu trách nhiệm vì hành vi của những người khác mà mk đã cùng nhau hợp tác trong quá
trình tiến hành hoạt động kinh doanh Phổ biến ở Mỹ, Anh → khi lựa chọn, ng ta sẵn sàng gánh chịu trách nhiệm do bản
thân mk gây ra để ko gây ảnh huởg tới doanh nghiệp → unlimited liabilities: mô hình cty chịu trách nhiệm vô hạn đối với
chủ nợ (creditors) và đối với những nghĩa vụ tài sản khác mà cty sẽ phải thực hiện
3.Công ty (Corporation). Việt Nam: công ty trách nhiệm hữu hạn (limited liability company - closed company) và
công ty cổ phần (pubic company - choice sock company)
Tình huống HAPACO: cty cổ phần giấy HP → quản lí 1 cách triêtj để hơn so với cty TNHH. Vì cty cổ phần nó public ra
ngoài công chúng, các cổ đông tiềm năng có thể căn cứ vào báo cáo tài chính của cty để qđinh mk có trở thành cổ đông
mới của cty hay ko? → ở cty cổ phần, Người đầu tư vào cty chưa chắc đã phải là ng vận hành công ty. Và ng ta quản lí
công ty cổ phần thông qua mô hình: Đại hội đồng cổ đông (General meeting of shareholder) Hình thức tổ chức bên dưới:
Board of Management (BOM), Board of Director (BOD)
→ Có quyền hạn để q li công ty theo sự phân công của các cổ đông
Ngoài ra, còn có: Ban kiểm sát (Luật doanh nghiệp VN 2020 - Hội đồng kiểm toán) - cơ quan kiểm soát nội bộ của cty cổ
phần. Và cơ quan này độc lập với BOM và BOD vì đơn vị này có quyền hạn nhất định trong việc kiểm tra giám sát các
hoạt động điều hành quản lí điều hành doanh nghiệp của BOM và BOD - người hỗ trợ các cổ đông trong việc bảo vệ
khoản tiền mà các cổ đông đã đầu tư vào công ty, tránh hành vi lạm dụng của BOD
Thuật ngữ: fiduciaries duty - nghĩa vụ của ng quản lí điều hành công ty - và họ phải thực hiện những tác nghiệp vì lợi ích
tốt nhất của công ty, và trong đó có lợi ích của cổ đông, những người góp vốn để thành lập công ty. Duty của Giám đốc,
các thành viên của ban giám đốc: phải trung thực, phải tiến hành các hoạt động vì lợi ích của công ty, và không được lạm
dụng quyền của mình để có thể trục lợi → ng tắc xuyên suốt trong qtrinh quản trị công ty → cty đc quản lí 1 cách lành
mạnh - hạn chế sự trục lợi, lạm quyền (abuse of power) của những ng nắm quyền quản lí, điều hành công ty
Khi những ng q lí công ty gây thiệt hại cho các cổ đông → theo quy định của luật doanh nghiệp, ng ta sẽ phải chịu trách
nhiệm cá nhân (trong phạm vi phần vốn người ta góp vào công ty) Luật Anh Mỹ (vén màn che công ty - corporate veil):
phân biệt tài sản công ty với các tài sản các thành viên của công ty, và có sự phân biệt về tính chịu trách nhiệm trong
công ty → khi góp vốn vào cty, các thành viên chịu trách nhiệm hữu hạn với phần vốn góp của mình
→ kinh doanh ở các mô hình limited liability company và pubic company thi có sự an toàn cho người góp vốn và người
thực hiện hoạt động kinh doanh. Vì dù công ty có bị thua lỗ hay phá sản thì ng ta chỉ chịu trách nhiệm cho những phần
vốn ng ta góp vào cho công ty, những tài sản khác sẽ không bị ảnh hưởng
Chương 10: contract formation - thiết lập hợp đồng
Chương 11: contract performance - thực hiện hợp đồng
1. Elements for a contract to be valid (executable contract).
2. And if there are some factors that can make the contract invalid and unenforceable - defense:
c. Contract form
• setting written
• <$10,000: verbal contract
d. Set up a contract
• Offer: offer the contract and Acceptance: accept the offer → the contract will be signed
• English and American: consideration - there is a physical move to prove that you intend to establish that contract (not
required in Vietnam)
When was the contract established? - have all the elements of offer (the original offerer sends the offer), acceptance
(the offer is accepted, the acceptance must go to the place of the original offer → established established)
When performing a contract, usually one party or two parties conduct acts that affect the interests of the
other party. eg: no delivery (non-delivery); non-payment (non-payment); lack of delivery; delivery does not conform to
the contract in terms of quality, quantity, location, delivery time... (comformerty: conformity
The violations of one party with the other party that cause damage to the other party will make that party liable →
Who wil be held accountable for the full amount of the compensation breach of contract → breach analysis:
non-delivery; non-payment (non-payment); lack of delivery; delivery does not conform to the contract in terms of quality,
quantity, location, delivery time... (incomformerty: conformity)
→ breach of contract will result in sanction: Remedies
• If there is a failure to continue to perform the contract (the parties must continue to act without it, it will affect the
other party's interests - if the goods are not delivered, they must be delivered in full, if the goods are not in accordance
with the quality, they must be exchanged. , hc compensates for damage with the difference There are amounts that the
violating party has to spend to remedy its violations (additional delivery, new purchase to replace)
c. Both goods and services
Which item violates the obligations of the supplier of goods (services) → commercial law of Vietnam - commercial law
2005
• The seller, the service provider, the service receiver, the purchaser → who is the violator. Such violations shall be handled
according to the provisions of the law
• Contract performance: the parties have entered into a contract, but in the process of performance, due to events
(unintentional; or intentionally performed by the parties but it affects the interests of the party) kia → The contract is
terminated) → remesies applies to violations - APPLICATION OF VIETNAM LAW (2005 Law and commerce), who is
held to be responsible for the contract violation and give your analysis. How does that act violate the obligations in
the contract -> give a plan to apply the law + the violated parties have the right to terminate the contract (terminate the contract);
+ do not terminate the contract but require the other party to continue to perform the contract if the breach is
considered unimportant or not fundamental → the contract will continue to be performed
+ if the breach is fundamental or serious, the contract may be terminated (termination - to be terminated) → the
breaching party will have to pay damages and bear other sanctions
CHƯƠNG 18: There are 3 types of enterprises that are said to be common in the structure of the economy:
1. One-owner business - sole trader (Vietnam calls it a private enterprise - popular)
Characteristics: individuals are unlimitedly liable for the debts of the business with all their assets
2. Partnership: with capital contribution and association of 2 or more individuals and organizations to do business
together under one name and enjoy benefits from that business. However, Partnership is an unpopular form in Vietnam
because the liability of the members of the Partnership is considered unlimited like a sole trader - it is also a joint liability
when the members have to bear the burden. joint responsibility for the carelessness and acts of other members caused
to their customers → the remaining members must be jointly responsible for the consequences that result from the
violation, lack of understanding knowledge of the general partners → less favored because of the fear that the members
of the Partnership will be jointly responsible for the actions of others with whom they have cooperated in the course of
conducting business. variables in the US, UK → when choosing, people are willing to bear the responsibility caused by
themselves so as not to affect the business → unlimited liability: corporate model has unlimited liability for creditors
(creditors) ) and for other property obligations that the company will have to perform
3. Corporation. Vietnam: limited liability company - closed company and joint stock company - public company
The HAPACO situation: HP paper joint stock company → manages more thoroughly than a limited company. Since the
joint stock company is public to the public, potential shareholders can base themselves on the company's financial
statements to determine whether or not they will become a new shareholder of the company? → In a joint stock
company, the person who invests in the company is not necessarily the person who runs the company. And people
manage joint stock companies through the model: General meeting of Shareholders.
Organization form below: Board of Management (BOM), Board of Director (BOD)
→ Have the power to manage the company according to the assignment of the shareholders
In addition, there are: Supervisory Board (Vietnam Enterprise Law 2020 - Auditing Council) - the internal control agency
of the joint stock company. And this agency is independent from BOM and BOD because this unit has certain powers in
inspecting and monitoring the business management and administration activities of BOM and BOD - who assist
shareholders in ensuring the safety of the business. protect the money that shareholders have invested in the company,
avoid abusive behavior by BOD
Term: fiduciaries duty - the duty of the management to run the company - and they must perform operations in the
best interest of the company, and including the interests of shareholders, who contribute capital to the company's
success. Set up the company. Duty of the Director, members of the Board of Directors: must be honest, must conduct
activities for the benefit of the company, and must not abuse their rights to be able to profit. corporate governance → the
company is managed in a healthy way - limiting the abuse of power (abuse of power) by those in power to manage
and run the company
When the company managers cause damage to the shareholders → according to the provisions of the enterprise law,
they will be personally liable (within the amount of capital they contribute to the company). corporate veil:
distinguishing the company's assets from the assets of the company's members, and having the distinction of liability in
the company → when contributing capital to the company, the members bear the responsibility of the company. limited
liability with his capital contribution
→ doing business in limited liability company and public company models, there is safety for capital contributors and
people conducting business activities. Because even if the company suffers a loss or goes bankrupt, people are only
responsible for the capital they contribute to the company, other assets will not be affected.
Câu 1: (2 điểm) Khi đề nghị, chúng ta hỏi ai đó xem họ có muốn thứ gì không hoặc họ có muốn chúng ta làm gì cho họ
không. Chúng tôi thường nói có, vui lòng hoặc không, cảm ơn khi chúng tôi trả lời các đề nghị. Bạn có đồng ý hay không với
nhận định trên? Hãy làm một ví dụ về một đề nghị thương mại để mua một số hàng hóa ở Việt Nam.
Câu 2: (2 điểm) Bên bán có hộ khẩu tại quận Đống Đa có hợp đồng mua bán máy vi tính với bên mua cư trú tại quận
Thanh Xuân. Người mua kiện Người bán đòi bồi thường thiệt hại do hàng hóa bị lỗi gây ra thiệt hại. Tòa án Đống Đa hay
tòa án Thanh Xuân sẽ có thẩm quyền giải quyết tranh chấp? Tại sao?
Question 3:
Vào ngày 13 tháng 12 năm 2006, Christopher Norris Photographers đã ký hợp đồng cung cấp dịch vụ chụp ảnh cho đám
cưới của Meredith Daney vào ngày 3 tháng 8 năm 2007 với tổng giá là 3.203,50 đô la. Cô Daney đã đặt cọc $500. Đoạn
4 của Hợp đồng nêu rõ "Nếu thỏa thuận này bị hủy bỏ trong vòng sáu mươi (60) ngày kể từ Ngày cưới, Người mua phải
chịu trách nhiệm thanh toán toàn bộ giá hợp đồng." Đoạn 18 của Hợp đồng nêu rõ "Mọi thay đổi, sửa đổi, xóa hoặc hủy
bỏ phải được lập thành văn bản và có chữ ký của tất cả các bên." Vào tháng 6 năm 2007, cô Daney gọi cho Norris để thay
đổi ngày cưới từ ngày 3 tháng 8 năm 2007 thành ngày 8 tháng 8 năm 2008. Cô Daney được cho biết rằng theo các điều
khoản của hợp đồng, mọi thay đổi phải được lập thành văn bản. Cô Daney được thông báo rằng cô có thể gửi thư hoặc
e-mail và việc thay đổi ngày có thể được đáp ứng. Vào ngày 25 tháng 6 năm 2007, Norris nhận được một thông báo
bằng văn bản từ cô Daney thông báo cho văn phòng về ngày cưới được lên lịch lại của cô. Không có xác nhận bằng văn
bản về sự thay đổi từ Norris. Cô Daney làm chứng rằng vào khoảng tháng 8 năm 2007, cô và vị hôn phu đã hủy bỏ đám
cưới hoàn toàn. Cô ấy làm chứng rằng cô ấy đã liên hệ với tất cả các nhà cung cấp dịch vụ tổ chức đám cưới của mình,
bao gồm cả Norris, để hủy dịch vụ của họ. Cô ấy đã gửi cho Norris một email để thông báo về việc hủy bỏ của cô ấy; tuy
nhiên, cô ấy không thể xuất trình e-mail và Norris không có hồ sơ về việc nhận nó trong nhật ký hoặc trên máy tính của
anh ấy.
Cô ấy nói rằng cô ấy không còn sử dụng tài khoản email Yahoo mà cô ấy đã gửi thông báo hủy bỏ và cha mẹ cô ấy không
còn có máy tính để gửi thông báo đó. Cô ấy yêu cầu không phải chịu trách nhiệm về toàn bộ số tiền trong hợp đồng vì cô
ấy đã hủy bỏ. Norris, LLC v. Daney, Slip Copy, 2010 WL 4149350 (Ứng dụng Ohio, Quận 8)
Câu 3: (2 điểm) Hợp đồng được xác lập khi nào? Cô Daney có hủy các dịch vụ thành công không? Tại sao hay tại sao
không?
Câu 4: (2 điểm ) Cô Daney yêu cầu không phải chịu trách nhiệm về toàn bộ số tiền trong hợp đồng vì cô đã hủy hợp đồng.
bạn có đồng ý với cô ấy không? Tại sao hay tại sao không?
Câu 5 (2 điểm ) Theo Luật Thương mại năm 2005 (Việt Nam) và Luật giao dịch điện tử (Việt Nam) năm 2004, ai sẽ chịu
trách nhiệm thanh toán toàn bộ số tiền trong hợp đồng? Đưa ra phân tích của bạn.
Question 1:
This statement is commonly popular in definition of offer or both offering and replying in normal life. However, in
business law, I do not agree with the above statement.
In business, an offer is the first part of a contract. It must include intent to contract versus negotiation. Moreover, under
common law the offer must contain essential terms of the contract: (1) parties, (2), subject matter of the contract, (3)
price, (4) payment terms, (5) delivery terms, (6) performance times
An example on a commercial offer to buy some merchandise in Vietnam:
Ananas shoes company proposed to establish a contract to buy and sell shoes manufactured by Anh Duong factory, the
director of Ananas company directly went to meet the director of Anh Duong factory to propose a contract. The director
of Ananas company gave the terms of the contract on price, quality, payment method, delivery, and performance time...
to Anh Duong enterprise.
Question 2:
Both the Dong Da court (the court where the defendant resides) and the Thanh Xuan court (the court where the plaintiff
resides) will have jurisdiction over the dispute.
Because the jurisdiction of the territorial Court to settle contractual disputes is determined as follows:
The court where the defendant resides or works, if the defendant is an individual, or where the defendant is
headquartered, if the respondent is an agency or organization, is competent to settle according to first-instance
procedures contract disputes over contracts. civil, commercial, and labor matters specified in Articles 26, 28, 30 and 32 of
the Civil Procedure Code;
The involved parties have the right to agree with each other in writing to request the Court where the plaintiff
resides or works, if the plaintiff is an individual or the place where the plaintiff is headquartered, if the plaintiff is an
agency or organization to settle civil, business, commercial and labor disputes specified in Articles 26, 28, 30 and 32 of
this Code;
If the subject matter of the dispute is immovable property, only the Court of the locality where the immovable
property is located has jurisdiction to settle the dispute.
Case summary:
December 13, 2006: the contract was accepted, and Ms. Daney paid the fee fully
June 2007: Ms. Daney send a letter or an e-mail about changing the date (mail an offer)
June 25, 2007: Noris received the changing information. No confirmation
August 2007: Daney canceled the Noris service. Noris did not receive the cancelation
Question 3:
The contract established on December 13, 2006
Ms. Daney did not cancel the services successfully. Because the changing of wedding date was not confirmed by Noris.
Moreover, Paragraph 18 of the Contract states "Any changes, amendments, deletions or cancellations must be in writing
and signed by all parties.". In this case, it lacked confirmation of Noris.
Therefore, it did not have valid writing and was signed by all parties.
Question 4:
I do not agree with Ms. Daney that rejected her responsibility for the full contract amount because she had canceled.
She requested to change the wedding date but has not received confirmation from Noris, so the wedding date is still
recognized as the information on the contract (August 3, 2007).
Furthermore, in August 2007 when she canceled the wedding and sent an email to cancel the services, she was not able
to produce the e-mail and Norris had no record of its receipt in his log or on his computer. That means there is no
agreement for service cancellation between the two parties
In addition, paragraph 4 of the Contract states "If this agreement is canceled within sixty (60) days of the Wedding Date,
Buyer shall be responsible for the full contract price.", the time she sent the email requesting to cancel the service was in
August.
Therefore, she still had to be responsible for the full contract price.
Question 5:
The 2005 Law on Commerce (Vietnam)
Article 304. Obligation to prove loss
The party claiming damages must demonstrate the loss, the extent of the loss caused by the breach, and the direct profit
that the aggrieved party would have enjoyed if the breach had not occurred.
Article 315. Notice of suspension of contract performance, termination of contract performance or contract cancellation
The party that suspends contract performance, terminates contract performance, or cancels the contract must
immediately notify the other party of the suspension, suspension, or cancellation of the contract. In case of failure to
immediately notify and cause damage to the other party, the party who suspends contract performance, terminates
contract performance, or cancels the contract must compensate for damage.
Vietnamese Civil Code 2015:
Article 423. Cancellation of contracts
1. A party has the right to cancel a contract and shall not be liable to compensate for damage in any of the following
cases:
a) A violation of contract by the other party gives rise to cancellation as agreed by the parties;
b) The other party seriously violates the obligations in the contract;
c) Others circumstances as provided by law.
2. Serious violation means the failure to fulfill obligations properly by a party leading the failure to achieve the purposes
of entering a contract by the other party.
3. A party cancelling a contract must notify the other party immediately of the cancellation [and] must compensate if
the failure to notify causes damage.
Conclude:
Daney says she has notice of termination, but Norris has not received that request. Because Noris has not performed his
service for Daney's side, there is no property damage.
According to articles 304 and 315 of the 2005 Law on Commerce (Vietnam), article 423 of the Vietnamese civil code,
Daney's cancellation of such a contract is considered valid. Noris has not fulfilled her obligations yet, so she will need to
prove the extent of the loss. If there is no loss, the parties do not have to continue to fulfil their obligations, so Noris will
have to refund the money Daney has paid.
Question 1: (2 marks) When we offer, we ask someone if they would like to have something or if they would like us to do
something for them. We usually say yes, please or no, thanks when we reply to offers. Do you agree or not with the
above statement? Make an example on a commercial offer to buy some merchandise in Vietnam.
Answer:
I do not agree with the above statement. Although this way of offering and replying to an offer can be regularly seen in
normal social life, it is not always the case. In business, an offer is a promise to do or refrain from doing something in
exchange for something else. For example, A can make an offer to purchase B’s goods at a large amount, and, in return, to
buy those goods at a discounted price. A commercial offer is only valid if it demonstrates 6 components: (1) Parties, (2)
Subject matter, (3) price, (4), Payment terms, (5) Delivery terms, (6) Performance times.
For example, Mondelez (a snack manufacturer, Party A) made an offer to purchase 2.3 tons of flour (product) from
Vinaflour (a flour manufacturer in Vietnam, Party B) at a 10% discount from the market price at November 4th 2022
(price). Mondelez will pay 100% in credit before December 15th 2022. (Payment terms) The flour should be delivered in
full amount (delivery term) no later than December 24th 2022 (performance times).
Question 2: (2 marks) Seller, who has a domicile in Dong Da district, has a contract for the sale of computers with Buyer
who resides in Thanh Xuan district. Buyer sues Seller for damages because of the harm resulting from the defected
goods. Dong Da court or Thanh Xuan court will have jurisdiction over the dispute? Why?
Answer:
According to point a, clause 1, Article 39 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Vietnam 2015, regarding the jurisdiction of the
Court by territory, “The jurisdiction to settle civil cases of the territorial courts is determined: the Court where the
defendant resides. residing or working, if the defendant is an individual or where the defendant is headquartered, if the
defendant is an agency or organization competent to settle according to first-instance procedures civil, marriage and
family disputes, business, commerce and labor specified in Articles 26, 28, 30 and 32 of this Code”.
Thus, in this case, because the Seller was the defendant and the Seller has a domicile in Dong Da district, Dong Da court
will have jurisdiction over the dispute.
Question 3:
●
The contract was established on December 13, 2006.
In order for the request to cancel the services to be successful, under the terms of the contract, "Any changes,
amendments, deletions or cancellations must be in writing and signed by all parties." This means there are 2
requirements:
1.
The request from Ms. Daney must be in writing.
2.
The request from Ms. Daney must be accepted and signed by Norris.
The announcement of cancellation from Ms. Daney was not delivered successfully via email and not saved in any written
record to be found. Moreover, Norris had no record of its receipt in his log or on his computer, and thus, could not
demonstrate that he received the information.
Even if Ms. Daney successfully produced the email as notification of her cancellation, there was no evidence or testimony
from either party that Norris signed off on the cancellation notice to express his acceptance of the cancellation.
Therefore, Ms. Daney did not cancel the services successfully.
Question 4: (2 marks ) Ms Daney asked not to be held liable for the full contract amount because she had canceled. Do
you agree with her? Why or why not?
I do not agree with Ms. Daney,
According to the contract terms, "Any changes, amendments, deletions or cancellations must be in writing and signed by
all parties." While Ms. Daney did send a written communication informing Norris of her rescheduled wedding date, Ms.
Daney failed to receive a written confirmation of the change from Norris. Thus, the wedding date was not successfully
changed to August 8, 2008, and remained August 3, 2007 as original.
Following this, under the contract, "If this agreement is canceled within sixty (60) days of the Wedding Date, Buyer shall
be responsible for the full contract price." The announcement of cancellation made by Ms. Daney was in August 2007,
less than 60 days from the Wedding Date. Therefore, she should be held responsible for the full contract price.
Question 5 (2 marks ) According to the 2005 Law on Commerce (Vietnam) and the 2004 Law on e-transactions
(Vietnam), who shall be held liable for the full contract amount? Give your analysis.
Answer:
According to Article 85 from the 2005 Law on Commerce (Vietnam), regarding the responsibility of the Customer in a
Service contract, the customer is responsible to provide timely plans, instructions and other details so that service
delivery is carried out without delay or interruption. In addition, Article 18 from the 2004 Law on e-transactions
(Vietnam) also stated that regarding the delivery of messages between parties, “In case the originator has sent a data
message without declaring that the receiver must send the confirmation message and has not received the confirmation
message, the originator may notify the recipient that the message has not been received. notifies the confirmation and
assigns a reasonable period of time for the recipient to send the confirmation; if the originator still does not receive the
confirmation message within the specified time, the originator has the right to consider that the data message has not
been sent.”
In this case, the notification of rescheduling and cancellation from Ms. Daney were not successful, and did not receive
valid confirmation from Norris. Thus, it can be argued that Ms. Daney failed to provide timely plans and instructions for
the service to be carried out, as a responsibility of a customer. Therefore, Ms. Daney shall be held liable for the full
contract amount.
Question 1:
- I agree with the given statement because it is common reciprocity, if someone do you a favor, you should have
something for them in return.
- Example: On July 14, 2021, the buyer (Hanaka Company) wanted to purchase wooden pallet and wooden top frame
from the seller (Minh Dai Company). After some conversations to discuss all the terms orally, they reached a contract
citing all the terms and the responsibilities of the two parties. This is the documents to base on if a dispute occurred.
Question 2:
- Dong Da court will have jurisdiction over the dispute.
- Because the place of residence of the defendant is a basis for determining the Court having jurisdiction to settle the civil
case. Specifically, Point a, Clause 1, Article 39 of the 2015 Civil Code stipulates: The jurisdiction to settle civil cases by
territorial courts is determined:
+ The court where the defendant resides or works if the defendant is an individual,
+ The place where the defendant is headquartered if the defendant is an agency or organization.
In this case, the seller is the defendant, who has a domicile in Dong Da district. Therefore, Dong Da court will have
jurisdiction over the dispute.
Question 3:
- The contract between Christopher Norris Photographers (the seller/service provider) and Ms. Daney (the buyer) was
established on December 13, 2006.
- Ms. Daney failed to cancel the serviced with Christopher Norris Photographers.
- Because Paragraph 18 of the Contract states "Any changes, amendments, deletions or cancellations must be in writing
and signed by all parties.". In reality, Ms. Daney already sent a written communication to Norris, and he received it.
However, Norris did not have any written confirmation to response. Therefore, there was only sign from the one side,
which is Ms. Daney, not both parties as mentioned in the Paragraph 18 of the Contract. That is why the cancellation of
the service was not approved.
Question 4:
- I disagree with her for 2 reasons mentioned below:
+ First, she already violated Paragraph 18 of the Contract when not having any written document and signs by the two
parties for her cancellation of the service. Therefore, Norris had the right to cancel the agreement of the two parties if Ms.
Daney refused to use the service. Based on Paragraph 4 of the Contract stating that "If this agreement is canceled within
sixty (60) days of the Wedding Date, Buyer shall be responsible for the full contract price." The wedding was originally
scheduled to be held on August 3, 2007, and the dispute occurred within 60 days of the wedding date, if Norris decided
to cancel the agreement, based on Paragraph 4, Ms. Daney (the buyer) was held liable for the full contract amount
because she had canceled.
+ Second, she did not show any evidence of written document that she had sent notification to Norris, which is another
factor against her.
Question 5:
- Clause 1, Article 18 of the 2005 Law on Commerce (Vietnam) states that:
“1. Data message receiver is the person designated to receive the data message from the originator of the data message
but does not include the intermediary that transmits the data message.
2. Unless otherwise agreed by the parties to the transaction, the receipt of data messages is regulated as follows:
a) A recipient is deemed to have received a data message if the data message is entered into an information system
designated by that person and is accessible;
b) The recipient has the right to treat each data message received as an independent data message, except where the
data message is a copy of another data message of which the recipient is aware or is required to know the information.
that data message is duplicate;
c) In case before or while sending a data message, the originator requests or agrees with the recipient that the receiver
must send him/her a confirmation notice upon receiving the data message, the receiver must comply with this request or
agreement;
d) Where before or during the sending of a data message, the originator has declared that the data message is valid only
when there is a confirmation message, such data message is considered undelivered until the sender the originator
receives the recipient's notification confirming receipt of the data message;
dd) Where the originator has sent a data message without declaring that the recipient must send the confirmation
message and has not received the confirmation message, the originator may notify the recipient that it has not been
received. receive a confirmation notice and a reasonable period of time for the recipient to send the confirmation; if the
originator still does not receive the confirmation message within the specified time, the originator has the right to
consider that the data message has not been sent.
In this case, according to part a) the law, Norris might be declared to not have received the e-mail because e-mail from
Ms. Daney was no longer accessible. Moreover, based on part d) and dd), the fact that Norris did not send any
confirmation back to Ms. Daney reinforced the above argument that Norris did not receive the e-mail. For those reason,
Norris did not receive the e-mail according to the law, combining with the analogy in Question 4, there is enough
evidence to conclude that Ms. Daney shall be held liable for the full contract amount.
K61
On December 13, 2006, Christopher Norris Photographers contracted to provide photography for Meredith Daney's
wedding on August 3, 2007 for a total price of $3,203.50. Ms. Daney paid a $500 deposit. Paragraph 4 of the Contract
states "If this agreement is canceled within sixty (60) days of the Wedding Date, Buyer shall be responsible for the full
contract price." Paragraph 18 of the Contract states "Any changes, amendments, deletions or cancellations must be in
writing and signed by all parties." In June 2007, Ms. Daney called Norris to change her wedding date from August 3,
2007 to August 8, 2008. Ms. Daney was told that under the terms of the contract, any changes had to be in writing. Ms.
Daney was told she could send a letter or an e-mail and that the date change could be accommodated. On June 25,
2007, Norris received a written communication from Ms. Daney informing the office of her rescheduled wedding date.
There was no written confirmation of the change from Norris. Ms. Daney testified that sometime in August 2007, she
and her fiancé canceled their wedding altogether. She testified that she contacted all her wedding vendors, including
Norris, to cancel their services. She sent Norris an email as notification of her cancellation; however, she was not able to
produce the e-mail and Norris had no record of its receipt in his log or on his computer. She said that she no longer used
the Yahoo email account from which she sent the cancellation notice and that her parents no longer had the computer
from which it was sent. She asked not to be held liable for the full contract amount because she had canceled. Norris, LLC
v. Daney, Slip Copy, 2010 WL 4149350 (Ohio App. 8 Dist.)
2. JUDICIAL DECISION.
2.1. Relevant precedent.
In Montgomery v. Rojeck Marketing Group, Inc., Cuyahoga App. No. 79310, 2002-Ohio-484, this court reviewed a
contract that required the signature of both parties when making modifications to its original terms. We held that one
party’s failure to sign off on a modification as the contract required renders the contract unaltered.
Rule 56(C) of the Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure provides that summary judgment is proper only if the trial court
determines that:
(1) no genuine issue as to any material fact remains to be mitigated;
(2) the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law;
(3) it appears from the evidence, viewed most strongly in favor of the non-moving party, that reasonable minds can
come to but one conclusion and that conclusion is adverse to that party.
Temple v. Wean United, Inc. (1977), 50 Ohio St.2d 317, 327, 364 N.E.2d 267. Under the Rule and the controlling case law
of this state, the moving party must support the motion with affirmative
evidence in order to meet its burden of proving that no genuine issue of material fact exists for trial.
Civ.R. 56; Dresher v. Burt (1996), 75 Ohio St.3d 280, 662 N.E.2d 264; Fyffe v. Jeno’s, Inc. (1991), 59 Ohio St.3d.115, 510
N.E.2d 1108.
2.2. Judicial decision.
Daney canceled the Contract 60 days prior to her wedding date, she is bound by its terms as written, including payment
of the full balance due and owing. Although email would be a proper method of canceling the Contract, the trial court
erred by allowing Ms. Daney to cancel the Contract without Norris’s also signing off on the written notification. Norris’s
first assignment of error is sustained, and the decision of the trial court is reversed. Having determined that the trial court
erred in finding in Ms. Daney’s favor as a matter of law, Norris’s second assigned error is moot.
Judgment reversed.
It is ordered that appellant recover from appellee costs herein taxed.
The court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal.
It is ordered that a special mandate be sent to said court to carry this judgment into execution.
3. Group’s opinion.
3.1. Contract law.
A contract is a legally enforceable agreement between two or more parties where each assumes a legal
obligation that must be completed. Parties who misunderstand the terms of their agreement may sue each
other and have a court settle the argument.
Terms of the contract and validity:
Any written and agreed contract need to have all the necessary components such as the parties involved in the contract,
the subject in which the contract is made, the price of the contract and the payment terms agreed upon by the parties,
the delivery terms of the contract and the performance of the contract
Legal issues involving contracts arise most often when one party fails to perform the legal obligation it has agreed to do.
When a party breaches a contract by failing to perform, the other party can often sue for money damages, or, in some
limited cases, can ask the court to force the other party to perform as promised.
3.2. Group’s opinion.
The trial court erred as a matter of law by determining that a party could timely cancel the contract in a
manner expressly excluded by the contract.” Ms. Daney offers no explanation for her failure to save a copy of the
email or attempt, in the course of this litigation, to obtain a copy by accessing her old account.
Norris argues that the trial court erred by construing the Contract to allow for cancellation in the
manner chosen by Ms. Daney, which is not expressly allowed under its terms. We agree. “Because the issue is a
question of contract law, Ohio appellate courts must determine whether the trial court’s order is based on an
erroneous standard or a misconstruction of the law.”
It does not expressly include or exclude the use of email communication, as opposed to a handwritten or typed letter on
paper. No other paragraph of the Contract specifically addresses the method of written communication required.
Therefore, it was not error for the trial court to conclude that email communication between the parties was an
acceptable form of writing. We find that the Contract, which specified cancellation in writing only, contemplated and
permitted that writing could be done via email. Nonetheless, we find that Ms. Daney’s failure to receive confirmation
in writing from Norris is fatal to her case.
After studying deeply about the case, our group agree with the judicial opinion based on two main reasons:
- First of all, according to the Contract, in paragraph 4 of the Contract states that: “If this agreement is cancelled
within 60 days of the Wedding date, Byers shall be responsible for the full contract price”.
- Secondly, Paragraph 18 of the Contract clearly requires that "Any changes, amendments, deletions or
cancellations ** must be in writing and signed by all parties." We find no ambiguity in the terms of the Contract on this
issue. Even if Ms. Daney sent an email in 2007, as the trial court believed she did, there was no evidence or testimony
from either party that Norris signed off on the cancellation notice or in any way confirmed receipt of her
alleged email. We note that Ms. Daney’s letter of June 25, 2007, which changed her wedding date, was also not
confirmed by a written response from Norris.
We all agreed that Mrs. Daney is the one who violated the contract first when she did not follow the two terms
as agreed before in the Contract. For that breach of contract, she is liable for the whole cost which is
$3,203.50.
4. Precedent in Vietnam.
4.1. Contract law in Vietnam.
Luật dân sự - Mục 7: Hợp đồng.
●
Điều 421. Sửa đổi hợp đồng
1. Các bên có thể thỏa thuận sửa đổi hợp đồng.
2. Hợp đồng có thể được sửa đổi theo quy định tại Điều 420 của Bộ luật này.
3. Hợp đồng sửa đổi phải tuân theo hình thức của hợp đồng ban đầu.
Điều 422. Chấm dứt hợp đồng
Hợp đồng chấm dứt trong trường hợp sau đây:
1. Hợp đồng đã được hoàn thành;
2. Theo thỏa thuận của các bên;
3. Cá nhân giao kết hợp đồng chết, pháp nhân giao kết hợp đồng chấm dứt tồn tại mà hợp đồng phải do chính cá nhân,
pháp nhân đó thực hiện;
4. Hợp đồng bị hủy bỏ, bị đơn phương chấm dứt thực hiện;
5. Hợp đồng không thể thực hiện được do đối tượng của hợp đồng không còn;
6. Hợp đồng chấm dứt theo quy định tại Điều 420 của Bộ luật này;
7. Trường hợp khác do luật quy định.
Điều 428. Đơn phương chấm dứt thực hiện hợp đồng
1. Một bên có quyền đơn phương chấm dứt thực hiện hợp đồng và không phải bồi thường thiệt hại khi bên kia vi phạm
nghiêm trọng nghĩa vụ trong hợp đồng hoặc các bên có thỏa thuận hoặc pháp luật có quy định.
2. Bên đơn phương chấm dứt thực hiện hợp đồng phải thông báo ngay cho bên kia biết về việc chấm dứt hợp đồng, nếu
không thông báo mà gây thiệt hại thì phải bồi thường.
3. Khi hợp đồng bị đơn phương chấm dứt thực hiện thì hợp đồng chấm dứt kể từ thời điểm bên kia nhận được thông báo
chấm dứt. Các bên không phải tiếp tục thực hiện nghĩa vụ, trừ thỏa thuận về phạt vi phạm, bồi thường thiệt hại và thỏa
thuận về giải quyết tranh chấp. Bên đã thực hiện nghĩa vụ có quyền yêu cầu bên kia thanh toán phần nghĩa vụ đã thực
hiện.
4. Bên bị thiệt hại do hành vi không thực hiện đúng nghĩa vụ trong hợp đồng của bên kia được bồi thường.
5. Trường hợp việc đơn phương chấm dứt thực hiện hợp đồng không có căn cứ quy định tại khoản 1 Điều này thì bên đơn
phương chấm dứt thực hiện hợp đồng được xác định là bên vi phạm nghĩa vụ và phải thực hiện trách nhiệm dân sự theo
quy định của Bộ luật này, luật khác có liên quan do không thực hiện đúng nghĩa vụ trong hợp đồng.
Điều 516. Quyền của bên sử dụng dịch vụ.
2. Trường hợp bên cung ứng dịch vụ vi phạm nghiêm trọng nghĩa vụ thì bên sử dụng dịch vụ có quyền đơn phương chấm
dứt thực hiện hợp đồng và yêu cầu bồi thường thiệt hại.
Điều 520. Đơn phương chấm dứt thực hiện hợp đồng dịch vụ.
2. Trường hợp bên sử dụng dịch vụ vi phạm nghiêm trọng nghĩa vụ thì bên cung ứng dịch vụ có quyền đơn phương chấm
dứt thực hiện hợp đồng và yêu cầu bồi thường thiệt hại.
Luật giao dịch điện tử:
Điều 5. Nguyên tắc chung tiến hành giao dịch điện tử
1. Tự nguyện lựa chọn sử dụng phương tiện điện tử để thực hiện giao dịch.
2. Tự thỏa thuận về việc lựa chọn loại công nghệ để thực hiện giao dịch điện tử.
3. Không một loại công nghệ nào được xem là duy nhất trong giao dịch điện tử.
4. Bảo đảm sự bình đẳng và an toàn trong giao dịch điện tử.
5. Bảo vệ quyền và lợi ích hợp pháp của cơ quan, tổ chức, cá nhân, lợi ích của Nhà nước, lợi ích công cộng.
6. Giao dịch điện tử của cơ quan nhà nước phải tuân thủ các nguyên tắc quy định tại Điều 40 của Luật này.
Civil Law - Section 7: Contracts
Article 421. Modification of a contract
1. The parties may agree to modify the contract.
2. The contract may be modified in accordance with the provisions of Article 420 of this
Code.
3. Modified contracts must comply with the form of the original contract.
Article 422. Termination of a contract
A contract is terminated in the following cases:
1. The contract has been fulfilled.
2. By agreement of the parties.
3. In the case of natural persons, the contract is terminated upon the death of the
individual, and in the case of legal persons, the contract is terminated upon the
cessation of the existence that the contract was to be performed by the respective
natural or legal person.
4. The contract is terminated by cancellation or unilateral termination.
5. The contract becomes impossible to perform due to the non-existence of the subject
matter.
6. The contract is terminated in accordance with the provisions of Article 420 of this
Code.
7. Other cases as provided by law.
Article 428. Unilateral termination of contract performance
1. A party has the right to unilaterally terminate the performance of the contract without
compensating damages when the other party seriously breaches its obligations
under the contract or as agreed upon by the parties or provided by law.
2. The party unilaterally terminating the contract performance must promptly notify the
other party of the termination; if failure to give notice causes damages, compensation
must be provided.
3. When a contract is unilaterally terminated, the termination takes effect from the
moment the other party receives the notice of termination. The parties are not
required to continue performing their obligations, except for provisions on penalties
for breach, compensation for damages, and provisions on dispute resolution. The
party that has performed its obligations has the right to demand payment for the
fulfilled obligations.
4. The party suffering damages due to the other party's failure to fulfill its contractual
obligations is entitled to compensation.
5. In cases where the unilateral termination of contract performance is not based on the
provisions of paragraph 1 of this Article, the party unilaterally terminating the contract
performance shall be considered the party in breach of obligations and shall bear civil
liability as provided by this Code, other relevant laws for the failure to fulfill its
contractual obligations.
Article 516. Rights of service users.
2. In the event of serious breach of obligations by the service provider, the service user has
the right to unilaterally terminate the contract performance and claim compensation for
damages.
Article 520. Unilateral termination of service contract performance.
2. In the event of serious breach of obligations by the service user, the service provider has
the right to unilaterally terminate the contract performance and claim compensation for
damages.
Law on Electronic Transactions:
Article 5. General principles for conducting electronic transactions
1. Voluntary choice to use electronic means for conducting transactions.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Agreement on the choice of technology for conducting electronic transactions.
No technology shall be considered the sole means of electronic transactions.
Ensuring fairness and safety in electronic transactions.
Protecting the legitimate rights and interests of agencies, organizations, individuals,
the interests of the state, and public interests.
6. Electronic transactions conducted by state agencies must comply with the principles
specified in Article 40 of this Law.
Facts:
In 1981, Procter & Gamble (P&G) published a Pampers catalog promotional offer. Each box of Pampers has a printed
statement which described that a customer could order several baby products at a lower expenditure from the Pampers
Softouches Baby Catalog. To receive that benefits purchasers have to collect the teddy bear symbols as proof of
purchase (Teddy Bears points) on packages of Pampers diapers. The catalog would be sent free to consumers upon
request. The catalog would include pictures of the discounted items and the designated amount of Teddy Bears points
and cash necessary for purchase. All sale terms, including the expiry date of the offer, were pointed out in each catalog.
The only method for ordering merchandise was the use of the specific order form included in each catalog.
About April 1989, P&G released its final catalog. The front of the catalog stated that it was the final catalog and that the
offer would terminate on February 28, 1990.
Ms. Alligood and others had cut out and kept the teddy bear symbols. The diaper purchasers claim that an offer to enter
into a unilateral contract had been made in each package of Pampers, which they accepted by acquiring Pampers and
saving the teddy bear symbols as proof-of-purchasing.
Every package of Pampers printed the accurate language of the advertisements, which proclaimed that:
“Save the Teddy Bears points and use them to save money on toys, clothes, furniture, and lots of other baby things when
you shop the Pampers Baby Catalog. For your free copy of the Catalog, send your name, complete address and youngest
baby’s date of birth to:
Pampers Baby Catalog
P.O. Box 8634,
Clinton, Iowa 52736.”
II. JUDICIAL OPINION
PER CURIAM
It is basic contract law that to have an enforceable contract, there must be a meeting of the minds of the parties
to the contract. Noroski v. Fallet (1982), 2 Ohio St.3d 77, 2 OBR 632, 442 N.E.2d 1302. A valid contract must also be
specific as to its essential terms, such as the identity of the parties to be bound, the subject matter of the contract,
consideration, a quantity term, and a price term. See Mr Mark Corp. v. Rush, Inc. (1983), 11 Ohio App.3d 167, 11 OBR 259,
464 N.E.2d 586; 18 Ohio Jurisprudence 3d (1980), Contracts, Sections 17 and 140.
On May 1, 1989, two groups of plaintiffs filed separate complaints against defendant-appellee, the Procter Gamble
Company ("P&G"), alleging breach of contract arising from a catalogue promotion advertised on boxes of Pampers
diapers. The plaintiffs-appellants sought class-action certification and representation, which was granted on June 27,
1989. On June 16 and June 29, 1989, P&G filed motions to dismiss, requesting that they be treated as motions for
summary judgment. Following oral argument, the court of common pleas granted summary judgment to P&G on
October 30, 1989.
The plaintiffs had cut out and saved the teddy bear symbols. The plaintiffs claim that each package of Pampers
contained an offer to enter into a unilateral contract which they accepted by purchasing Pampers and saving the teddy
bear proof-of-purchase symbols. The plaintiffs specifically argue that their claim arises solely from the language on the
Pampers packages and has nothing to do with any of the language and terms contained within the catalogue.
In their single assignment of error, the plaintiffs allege that the trial court erred by finding that no valid contract existed
between the plaintiffs and P&G and by granting summary judgment to P&G. We find the assignment to be without merit
and affirm the judgment of the trial court.
However, the Ohio Supreme Court has stated that: "It is settled law that if the parties' manifestations taken together as
making up the contract when reasonably interpreted in the light of all the circumstances, do not enable the court to
determine what the agreement is and to enforce it without, in effect, `making a contract for the parties,' no enforceable
obligation results." Id. at 14, 40 O.O.2d at 37, 227 N.E.2d at 619. This is the situation before us. The language printed on
the boxes of Pampers, which the plaintiffs insist makes up the complete contract with P&G, is sorely lacking in all the
requirements necessary to create a valid contract. Only one of the parties, P&G, can be identified. The subject matter
of the alleged contract, as well as the consideration required of the offeree, is too vague to be discernible. The
advertisement states no price term or quantity term. As one Ohio court has stated, "a contract indefinite at the time of its
making is not binding." Preston v. First Bank of Marietta (1983), 16 Ohio App.3d 4, 16 OBR 4, 473 N.E.2d 1210. Without
question, the advertisement at issue does not rise to the level of a legally enforceable contract. Even if we considered the
advertisement in conjunction with the Pampers catalogue, which the plaintiffs have specifically asked us not to do, and
even if the expiration date in the catalogue had not passed, the advertisement and the catalogue took together would
not constitute an offer to enter into a contract. They create only an offer to receive offers, an invitation to order from the
catalogue. Erlich v. Willis Music Co. (1952), 93 Ohio App. 246, 51 O.O. 8, 113 N.E.2d 252; Craft v. Elder Johnston Co. (1941),
34 Ohio Law Abs. 603, 38 N.E.2d 416. As such, no legal obligations are created for which P&G can be held responsible.
Upon review of summary judgment, the evidence must be construed in favour of the nonmoving party and when the
evidence is so viewed if reasonable minds can come to only one conclusion against the nonmoving party, summary
judgment was properly granted. Hounshell v. American States Insurance Co. (1981), 67 Ohio 2 Alligood v. Procter Gamble
Co. 72 Ohio App. 3d 309 (Ohio Ct. App. 1991) St.2d 427, 21 O.O.3d 267, 424 N.E.2d 311; Temple v. Wean United, Inc.
(1977), 50 Ohio St.2d 317, 4 O.O.3d 466, 364 N.E.2d 267. In the case before us, we hold that in viewing all the evidence in
the plaintiffs' favour, reasonable minds must conclude in favour of P&G and that P&G is entitled to judgment as a matter
of law.
The exception to the rule that advertisements do not create any power of acceptance in potential offerees is where the
advertisement is " clear, definite, and explicit, and leaves nothing open for negotiation, " in that circumstance, " it
constitutes an offer, acceptance of which will complete the contract. "Lefkowitz v. Great Minneapolis Surplus Store, 251
Minn.188, 86 N.W.2d 689, 691. In Lefkowitz, the defendant had published a newspaper announcement stating: "Saturday
9 A.M. Sharp, 3 Brand New Fur Coats, Worth to $100.00, First Come First Served $ 1 Each." The plaintiffs had fulfilled all of
the terms of the advertisement and the advertisement was specific and left nothing open for negotiation. Based on that
reason, the court ruled a contract had been formed. (December 20th, 1957)
Compared with that case, about the case of Aligoods and P&G,the plaintiffs claimed that each package of Pampers
contained an offer to enter into a unilateral contract. On the other hand, the advertisement of the defendant requests
3 requirements to be an offer: the manifestation of present contractual intent, communication to offeree,
certainty & definiteness as to terms. And the agreement of an offer creates a contract. Because the advertisement of
the defendants does not show that they will want to have a contract. Additionally, they do not describe specifically the
characteristics of the redeem the purchasers receive. According to that reason, the advertisement of Pamper is not an
offer. So it could not be a contract. For more detail, the general rule is that an advertisement does not constitute a valid
contract.
In their single assignment of error, the plaintiffs allege that the trial court erred by finding that no valid contract existed
between the plaintiffs and P&G and by granting summary judgment to P&G. Because of the reasons mentioned above,
the decision of the trial court is, therefore, affirmed.
II.GROUP OPINION
According to the law, the advertisement and the catalog taken together would not constitute an offer to enter
into a contract. They create only an invitation to order from the catalog. As such, no legal obligations are created for
which P&G can be held responsible.
If that so, who was responsible for the precise language of the advertisement printed on packages of Pampers which
encouraged customers to buy more products? And does it mean that it is completely satisfactory for brands to use these
kinds of advertisements in order to promote their sales? There is no current law that requires brands to have legal
responsibility for this action, however, there are some negative effects of false advertising.
Firstly, false promotions affect consumers. The effects of misleading promotions on consumers is perhaps the worst
aspect about this kind of advertising. The consumer ends up making unnecessary decisions. Customers will end up
wasting valuable money on products and services, which ultimately, really won’t meet their needs or solve their
problems.
Secondly, false promotions affect the business itself. People do not take lies kindly. As soon as they find out that the
brand has been lying to them, the brand will lose customers’ trust. The worst thing that can happen is when the
consumers sue the brand for damages, which may cause it to incur hefty litigation costs later on and make its reputation
even worse.
Lastly, false promotions affect the perception of competition. Competition between companies should benefit the
consumer by providing better products at lower cost. It can benefit entire industries by encouraging innovation and
exploration. Competition forces companies to get creative and to spend money on researching and developing better
services and products. However, if a company is spending money on making false but attractive claims about their
products and services, their competitors are also likely to invest in misleading promotions to keep up with the race rather
than in innovation and creativity.
Although the law is satisfactory in protecting the rights and the essential needs to have a contract, the consumers’
interests have not received enough attention. We hope that in the future, there will be official laws to protect customers’
interests when they encounter and fall for false promotions.
There is no offer between Ms Alli and P&G was established. The advertisement of P&G and the catalog taken
together would not constitute an offer to enter into a contract. They create only an invitation to order from the
catalog. So, P&G is not offerer in this case. When Ms Alli filled up the order form in this catalog, she became the offeror
and P&G became the offeree. The contract only was established when P&G accepted the offer.
Because the is no contract b/w P&G and Ms Alli, then the is no parties formed
Fingerlakes Aquaculture LLC, an indoor fish hatchery, entered into a contract for Progas Welding Supply to build and
deliver a 13,000-gallon oxygen storage tank. The contract required that the tank be delivered during the week of June 21,
1999, with a $400-per-day liquidated damages provision, denoted as a “fine.” Throughout the year, Progas delivered
smaller tanks, but was never able to deliver the 13,000-gallon tank. In June 2001, Fingerlakes Aquaculture bought a tank
from another supplier and filed suit seeking the $400-per-day liquidated damages. Progas says that because of the
other tanks, Fingerlakes Aquaculture had no damages and the total of $292,000 (the $400 per day for the 210 days of
delay) was void as a penalty. Who is correct? Why? (Analysis appears at the end of the chapter.) [Fingerlakes
Aquaculture LLC v. Progas Welding Supply, Inc., 825 N.Y.S.2d 559 (2006)]
PART IV: JUDICIAL OPINION
The defendant proves that the amount of money that plaintiff claimed for damage is unreasonable in relation to the
amount of actual damage.
Fingerlakes Aquaculture’s damage will not go up to $292000 when Progas does not deliver a 13000-gallon tank,
●
in fact Progas delivered the smaller tanks in 120 days.
The contract only mentioned $400-per-day liquidated damages provision caused by delayed delivery of
●
13000-gallon tank; while FA had received several tanks of smaller capacity which were equivalent to store 13000-gallon
oxygen. But they didn’t feedback to Progas that they …
Whether a contractual provision represents an enforceable liquidation of damages or unenforceable penalty is a
●
question of law to be resolved after considering the nature of the contract and the circumstances at the time it was
entered into (see JMD Holding Corp. v Congress Fin. Corp., 4 NY3d 373, 379 [2005]).
Court of Appeals of the State of New York (Mar 31, 2005), JMD Holding Corp. v Congress Fin. Corp., 4 NY3d 373, 379
[2005]).
Retrieved from Casetext: Smarter Legal Research
https://casetext.com/case/jmd-holding-v-congress-fin
Just insignificant financial loss would be sustained by the failure to deliver the tank. Rather, loss would be
●
sustained by the failure to timely deliver oxygen, an event not addressed by the penalty clause (The contract).
The damage of Fingerlakes Aquaculture is because they do not have a good business plan, not by Progas.
●
Plaintiff could not prove the amount of damage from not delivering a 13000-gallon oxygen storage tank.
●
Under the circumstances here, an award to plaintiff of $292,000 would constitute a windfall well above the
●
actual harm sustained
=> The court decided to dismiss the plaintiff's complaint.
=> The defendant won the case.
PART V: OUR GROUP OPINION
1.
The court decision was right legally
Although the defendant was the one who violated the contract, they didn’t have to pay 292,000$ liquidated
●
damages fine.
The plaintiff could not prove the actual damage occurred because of the defendant's wrong delivered tanks.
●
The court held that the clause was void as a penalty because it applied whether there were damages or not.
●
The plaintiff was unable to prove the actual damage caused by the defendant's failure to deliver the
●
13,000-gallon tanks equal $292,000.
And another case JMD Holding Corp. v Congress Fin. Corp., 4 NY3d 373, 379 [2005] have been courting and
●
somehow is really the same.
1.
Plaintiff ’s mistake
They decided the liquidated damages of 400$-per-day as fine, which automatically apply whether or not the
●
actual damage occurred. And then the defendant couldn’t deliver the 13,000-gallon oxygen but instead, they delivered
smaller tanks. This was considered as they delivered the tank late, which was 210 days late in this case. As a result, the
liquidated damages clause applies automatically even if no actual damage caused by the defendant’s failure. Therefore,
it was void as a penalty.
The plaintiff didn’t understand the contract completely. They sought for a fine that could be void due to
●
contractual penalty. This may also be the result of lacking in preparation for the court because they were overconfident
that they were the right side in this case.
1.
Advice for Plaintiff
Even though it was defendant who breach. In this case, the liquidated damages clause was void because they
●
applied automatically whether or not the damage occurred. The plaintiff should be more detailed about this, for
example, a 400$-per-day fine if Progras delivered the tank late and then there were damage occurred due to their
mistake. Moreover, Progras must deliver a 13000-gallon oxygen tank. In case they deliver it wrong, they have to fix it
before the deadline. Or else, they will take the liquidated damages fine if Fingerlakes were damaged.
As the plaintiff could not prove their actual damage worth 292,000$ which was the liquidated damages fine
●
(computed by the court), they shouldn’t find a suit seeking for the liquidated damages fine but compensatory damages
fine instead. Firstly, because of Progras’s delivering the smaller tanks which was against their contract. Fingerlake had to
buy a tank from another supplier. Which caused the plaintiff to lose more money than they should have paid. Secondly,
the defendant conducted a negligent act when they delivered smaller tanks instead of 1 13,000-gallon tank as said in
the contract and caused actual damage to the plaintiff. That’s why the defendant had the duty to pay the plaintiff the
amount required to be as in good a position before the breach. If the plaintiff can show the court the actual financial
damage caused to them, then they would be the one who were entitled to judgment in their favor.
1.
Contact yourself
I think I should understand the laws better, especially contract law and learn well in Business Law so that I can avoid
some of the mistakes in the contract that other parties can take advantage of. In order to do so, I think I should read more
related law books to improve my knowledge about Law.
Contract law is broad so I need to read lots of modal law or contract to see how it looks like. In Civil Law of Vietnam from
Article from 385 to 429, the contract law is very complete and detailed so it is necessary to read it carefully.
Moreover, while I have to make a contract, I will make sure that it’s clear about what I should do and what I can benefit
from this contract, as well as remedies in case breach happens.
With the support from the precedent and the U.C.C, it can be seen that cases related to
liquidated damages shall be analyzed based on the rule that “The amount liquidated must be close
to actual loss, but with high amount, it will be regarded as a penalty and become invalid”.
Thus, the focused question in this case is: Whether the amount liquidated of $292,000
bears a reasonable proportion to the probable loss of the 13,000-gallon tank delayed supply or
not?
Some evidences were revealed to answer this question:
First, Progas proved that the failure to deliver the tank would result in negligible financial
loss. Rather, the major loss would be caused by the failure to deliver oxygen on time. However,
the timely delivery of oxygen was not addressed in the penalty provision. While Progas had not
delivered the required tanks by June 1999, they had been supplying smaller oxygen tanks during
the period of September 1999 through January 2000. In other words, they had found alternative
methods to perform the contract. Moreover, according to judicial decision, the failure of the
Fingerlake's business venture was most likely attributable to its weak business model and shoddy
construction, not the size of the oxygen tank.
Second, pursuant to a court judgement, although Fingerlake's officers testified that the fish
were "off feed" for 26 days of the 210 days between March and September 2000 due to a lack of
oxygen, the testimony about actual damages was speculative and unsupported by the record.
Besides, the $400 per day liquidated damage clause also applied both when there were damages
or not, meaning that it inevitably overestimated the actual damage.
Thus, an award of $292,000 to the Fingerlakes was substantially disproportionate to the
probable loss. The automatic application of the liquidated damages clause was invalid as a penalty.
4. The decision of the New York Court of Appeals
The judgment was affirmed, and the recovery amount was void as a penalty.
Thus, Progas was correct and did not have to pay the amount liquidated.
Plaintiff: LeAnn Rimes
- Defendant: Curb Records, Inc
Ms. Rimes' foremost argument is that the recording contract (which is binding) is void
because she signed as a minor, and that she has the absolute right to disaffirm the contract, and all
the provisions within, if she does not ratify it after reaching majority. This Court acknowledges
that under Texas law, this presumption is generally true. When Rimes signed the contract, she was
a minor, and even though there was a guardian on her behalf, she had no knowledge of what
information the contract included. That means Ms. Rimes had possible defense.
In Curb's Reply brief and in supplemental filings, the parties also dispute whether Rimes
has ratified this contract upon reaching majority. Hence, there is no need to address this aspect of
the litigation to properly decide the venue question.
As previously stated, Ms. Rimes' main argument in response to Curb's transfer motion is
that the entire contract, including the forum clause, is void because she entered into it as a minor.
However, until and unless she successfully voids the declaratory order of the Tennessee Chancery
Court disaffirming her minor status on July 5, 1995, this Court must afford full faith and credit to
the judgment of that court. For the purposes of determining venue at this early stage in the
litigation, this Court will not adjudicate this case on the merits before the order removing the
disability of Rimes' minority is properly challenged in the Tennessee state court system. As this
Court does not yet view Rimes as a minor at the time the contract was signed, her defense of
minority fails.
Moreover, looking into the forum selection, Ms. Rimes has the resources necessary to
litigate anywhere in the world. She does not allege fraud or duress; she clearly has the means to
litigate in Tennessee, and she neither raises any novel points of Tennessee law that disfavor her,
nor points to a specific Texas public policy that will suffer at the hands of the Tennessee federal
court. Hence, Ms. Rimes has not met her burden of proof that this forum selection clause was
unreasonable or drastically works against the interests of justice.
4. The judicial decision
On Jan 16, 2001, the suit was dismissed without prejudice. No reason was given for the dismissal.
The suit alleges no wrongdoing on Curb's part but repeatedly alludes to Rimes' age at the time the
contract was signed.
Harms v. Northland Ford Dealers
Based on the promulgated contest rules, Harms earned the prize when she sank her winning shot. She registered for the
tournament and paid her $160 entrance fee. During play at the contest hole, she teed off from the amateur women's red
marker, as she had done on all the other holes that day and the two previous days of the tournament. Concededly, she
hit from a point under the minimum distance dictated by Northland's insurer, but she was following the tournament rule
that required amateur women to tee from the red markers, not the yellow or the blue, as with the amateur men and the
professionals. None of the participants knew of the minimum yardage requirement. Yet only amateur women stood
ineligible to win the car if they followed the tournament rules.
The court ascribes to contract terms "their plain and ordinary meaning." Northland must abide by the rules it announced,
not by the ones it left unannounced. From the beginning, Northland's banner declared that a hole-in-one would win the
car, and throughout the contest, there was no further details given to contestants. Whatever ambiguity that
announcement contained should not be resolved against a contestant. Moreover, this was a vintage unilateral contract
with performance by the offeree as acceptance, when Jennifer Harms paid her $160 entrance fee. Therefore, the circuit
court rightly concluded that there were no issues of material fact on the breach of contract claim against Northland,
which support Harms' summary judgment.
For judicial opinion, when Harms sued, the circuit court granted her summary judgment against both Northland and
Moccasin Creek. The South Dakota Supreme Court affirmed that decision when the defendant appealed. “As the contest
sponsor, Northland breached its contract to award the prize in accord with the announced rules.” – John K. Konenkamp,
Justice.
Conclusion
Answering to the question of law above, Northland Ford Dealers cannot deny Ms. Harms her winning prize. Northland
Ford Dealers was wrong when they breached the contract to award the prize to Ms. Harms.