Grocery Inc. Paper

Running head: GROCERY INC. PAPER

Grocery Inc. Paper

Grocery, Inc., is a retail grocery store chain with stores located throughout the United States. The organization has contract with many vendors authorizing the store to sell the vendors products. There are many laws and guidelines that Grocery, Inc. must follow. We will review many different scenarios that the store may encounter and some the laws that they must abide by.

Common Law Contracts and UCC Article 2 Contracts

There is a possibility that both common law and UCC Article 2 contracts would apply between Grocery and their vendors, however for domestic purposes the UCC Article 2 contract would supersede that of the common law contract. Grocery also has international vendors which make it a bit more interesting, each country might have their own version of the US UCC, for example the United Kingdom has CISG (Contract for the International Sale of Goods) and while there are the trade abbreviations that widely used both here and abroad they might have different meanings. If the matter is brought to court they will “apply the definitions used in their own jurisdiction”, meaning that when contracts are created the language used must clearly express the wishes of both parties. (Cheeseman, page 398) Since the rules of Article 2 of the UCC can be applied in on aspect or another then it would be safe to say that Article 2 applies to the contracts with Grocery and its vendors.

Breach of Contract

It is my understanding that Grocery would win this case and that the courts would not see that Masterpiece had a right to discharge the contract due to commercial impracticability. “Courts are generally reluctant to grant relief under this provision because they (usually rightly) perceive that if someone invokes it, they are more often than not trying to get out of a contract that they would have been ill-advised to enter into in the first instance.” (http://www.willamette.edu/~blong/SalesLectures/Impracticability.html )

While Masterpiece Construction does have the right to subcontract out help/assistance on assignments they must still oversee the quality of workmanship that is being done. When Grocery contracted the job to Masterpiece Construction they did it because of the quality of work that Masterpiece is known for, however they did not receive the quality of work that they had paid for. Since Masterpiece elected to subcontract this job to another company, Build Them To Fall, they were vouching their workmanship. Masterpiece should also have communicated to their client that they had in fact subcontracted this job out and to whom, the contract could have been re-evaluated to determine if in fact Grocery wanted to proceed with the work that was to take place.

Contract Law

Jeff is requesting two things: one to be able to cancel the contract and two, to be given a refund for the 6 months of payment she made. Into the mix is the fact that Jeff is a minor and whether he could be held legally responsible is therefore questionable.

Smooth Sales Used Cars holds the legal cards for the most part. Different states have statutes related to whether minors can be held legally responsible in contracts. That the contract was signed in good faith is a factor for Smooth Sales Used Cars and that Jeff omitted the information are two key factors for the dealership. The dealership could inform Jeff that he is indeed responsible for the outstanding principle and interest and threaten legal action were Jeff unable to make the payments.