Blog #3

Name: Lecturer: Course: Date: Management Contract Breach Case A British court is currently listening to case that involves breach of contract between Sean Bradley and Jerry Coleman. The facts of the case hold that a shaft in Bradley’s mill broke rendering it inoperable. Apparently, Bradley had assigned Coleman with the task of transporting the broken shaft to an expert for repair in Minnesota. The conditions required immediate transportation of the shaft and Coleman obliged to perform his duty the following day. However, Coleman was not aware that the mill would not work without the shaft and hence neglected taking the shaft for repair the required day. This delay led to the mill being shut down for five days.

With all these facts standing, Bradley sued Coleman for three hundred pounds worth damages, and the case is still pending as it looks to make a final ruling on the matter. If I take the facts of this case into consideration, I then find that Sean Bradley did indeed suffer damages due to Coleman’s negligence. However, the main issue is the amount of damages the injured party is entitled.

Hence, the holding and rule of this case should be entitled on the premise that Bradley may recover damages incurred with reasonable contemplation at the time the contract was entered. The usual rule in such a case is that Bradley should be entitled to the amount the mill would have accrued had Coleman fulfilled his responsibility as agreed. Hence, Bradley is entitled to a reward of lost profits from the days the mill was rendered inoperable. However, if the two parties had agreed on exceptional circumstances that determined the contract, then breach of contract would amount to damages determined by those circumstances. Conflict Resolution Case In terms of conflict resolution, a conflict case between a young man and his mother is set to continue in court as the two disputes over land.

An Irish circuit court confirmed that the Mary Terrace decided to appeal against a cost order regarding her son’s action, Michael McNamara. Apparently, McNamara is seeking possession of 13 acres of land together with a house that his mother owns. Mr. McNamara had leased the land and house from his mother for 18 years between 1991 and 2009. He informed the court that his mother had made the intimation that she would leave the possession of the land and house at Silver grove.

Ms McNamara refuted this in defense and neither of them resides in the property. In McNamara’s view, I believe he has a legitimate expectation for getting legal possession of the land and house. In this regard, it is possible that his mother changed her decision over land possession since she may have reasoned in the best interests of her family and wanted to leave her other two sons a significant portion of the property. McNamara must have been forced into these proceedings by a desperate tragedy, and the court may not be in a position to solve this conflict in a fair and equal manner. Mr. McNamara claims his mother had assured him she would leave him possession of the property, a claim his mother refutes.

Hence, the conflicting arguments in this case make it difficult to make sound judgment since there is no written proof. In my view, the conflict will be resolved fairly by granting an equal management or share of the property between the two parties.