关于business law的case questions!1） Mickey,Donald and Goofy operated a catering business,trading as Mickey and Partners.After the dissolution of their firm,Donald immediately commenced a similar(catering) business in the name of Mickey and Partn

关于business law的case questions!1） Mickey,Donald and Goofy operated a catering business,trading as Mickey and Partners.After the dissolution of their firm,Donald immediately commenced a similar(catering) business in the name of Mickey and Partn
关于business law的case questions!
1） Mickey,Donald and Goofy operated a catering business,trading as Mickey and Partners.After the dissolution of their firm,Donald immediately commenced a similar(catering) business in the name of Mickey and Partners.Can Mickey restrain Donald from carrying on the said business?
2) In a contract where the seller had sold a number of bicycles to the Buyer,the Seller was to load the goods onto a ship to be transported to the Buyer.The seller packed the bicycles with crates marked with the Buyer's name and address.Before the bicycles could be despateched,the Seller went bankrupt and refused to surrender the goods to the Buyer.
With reference to the facts,elaborate on the Buyer's rights in the sale of goods contract.
3)Molly,a bakery owner,contracts to buy 500kg of sugar from Jeb,a supplier,at $1 per kg.Molly pays Jeb the deposit of $1 and Jeb promises to deliver the sugar to Molly on 1st June.On 1st June,Jeb packs the sugar for delivery to Molly but overheard his staff gossiping that Molly's business is doing badly.On 2nd June,Jeb informs Molly by phone that he would not be delivering the sugar to Molly.Molly had to purchase 500 kg of sugar from Joe at $2 per kg to meet urgent customer orders.
Discuss the following:
a） legalissuesregardingformation of contract;
b) legal issues regarding breach of contract;
c)remedies that Molly ma claim from Jeb for breach of contract.

关于business law的case questions!1） Mickey,Donald and Goofy operated a catering business,trading as Mickey and Partners.After the dissolution of their firm,Donald immediately commenced a similar(catering) business in the name of Mickey and Partn
第一个问题:
这是关于 restraint of trade 的可执行性.首先讨论当前的法律原则,举一两个先例个案 [例如:Mitchell v Reynolds (1711); Nordenfelt v Maxim (1894)],显示你知道有关的法律.然后运用有关法律于Mickey,Donald 的 case.你不是法官,而是律师,所以你的结论并不重要.老师只想知道你的法律知识,和运用有关法律原则于虚构的局面.然后再举另一个的先例来作结论,这样就可获得高分罗! 我不会帮你写答案,因为这费时费神.
Issues raised: (a) Generally the law does not allow any contract which attempts to restrain the freedom to conduct business: Mitchell v Reynolds (1711).
(b) However,the parties to the contract are allowed to restrict themselves, provided the restrictions (restraints) are reasonable and aimed at truely protecting legitimate interest (such as business connections and business secrets): Mason {1913](House of Lords).
(c) Had Mickey entered into any restraint contract with Donald, stating that Donald is prohibited from operating the same catering business within the radius of 5 miles in the town, within 3-5 years Donald left their firm, Mickey may be allowed by court to restrain Donald. But in this case, their firm was dissolved before Donald started his own business.So Donald may argue that the previous contract is not protecting any legitimate interests of Mickey.This means Donald is free to operate catering business in the same place.
(d)The name of the firm,Mickey and Partners, however, may be objected by Mickey on the ground that his name "Mickey" is used.But if Donald can prove that there are hundreds of Mickey in the town,Donald may be free to continue using the firm Mickey & Partners, unless Mickey can show he has copyright/trademark registered over the name.

第二个问题:(我不熟悉这方面的法律原则)
You need to discuss the sale of goods contract, and the Buyer's rights. Use two three cases to cite the legal principles involved, and then advise what should Buyer do to recover the goods purchased.
第三个问题:
First discuss the elements of a contract: offer & acceptance; consideration (payment).Provide one or two cases.
Then study Molly's case:Contract between Molly and Jeb was clearly formed (valid).Molly paid the consideration (though$1).
Breach of Contract: Jeb telephoned to rescind (撤消)the contract. Is this sufficient to terminate his (Jeb) contractual obligations? We need to read their contract on the rescission clause to determine Jeb's breach.It appears that Jeb had breached the contract by failing to deliver the sugar according to the date.
Remedies: Molly can sue Jeb for the breach of the contract. She may get general damages. But can she claim the losses--that she paid one dollar extra to Joe for the sugar? This will depend on whether Jeb has knowledge or can foresee that Molly cannot do business without the sugar from Jeb. (Use decisions in some cases to argue this issue.)
GOOD LUCK!