Products Or Services Of Accounting Businessâ€Myassignmenthelp.Com

Question: Discuss About The Products Or Services Of Accounting Business? Answer: Introducation The Australian Consumer Law, which is a part of Competition and Consumer Act, 2010 provides that any statement related with the products or services of the business need to be accurate, true and capable of being substantiated. On the other hand, if the consumers have been misled, points may be prescribed. In such a case it does not matter if the false statement was made intentionally or not. Therefore the Australian Consumer Law provides that it is illegal for a business to make an incorrect statement or a statement that may create the false impression.. Such statements include the statements or advertisements issued in the media (including print, television, radio or social media) or on the packaging of the product. Similarly, it also represents any statement that has been made a person who represents the business. Although the law provides that competitive advertising can be used for the purpose of promoting the superiority of the products or services of the company as compared to its competitors, but in such a case the claim should be accurate. Such a comparison can be related with the quality, price or the range of the product or services. Application: By applying the above mentioned legal rules to the facts of this question, it can be said that BikeHike Ltd is liable for the statement made by Gary. The reason is that this statement was a false statement and it has been made on the social media. Similarly, the statement was made by a person who represented the business management. Therefore, ToughMount can bring action under the Australian Consumer Law against BikeHike Ltd for the false statement made by Gary on the Facebook page of the company. Similarly, as Gary was representing the company, BikeHike Ltd when he made the statement, it can be said that the companies liable for Gary's actions. the first issue in this case, is if the elements required to create a valid contract are present between Brenda and Steven which may allow Brenda to sue Steven for breach of contract. Similarly, another issue is the remedies that may be available to Brenda, if it is established that there has been a breach of contract. Rule: The Australian contract law provides the rules related with the formation of a valid contract between the parties. The formation of a contract deals with the requirements that are necessary to make a valid contract. A contract can be described as a promise or a set of promises that can be legally enforced against the parties. Therefore in this regard, a promise can be described as an undertaking by one party or not to do something in return the other person agrees or promises to do or not to do something. Such a promise or a set of promises becomes legally enforceable if certain essential elements are present. For this purpose it is required that there should be an agreement between the parties (offer and acceptance), along with consideration and the intention of entering into legal relations, as well as the legal capacity of the parties to contract. The common law provides for the remedy of damages and liquidated claims. In cases where there has been a breach of contract. In this context, the damages are awarded by the court as a substitute for performance. Before the damages are awarded with a view to raise the plaintiff in the same position in which it would have been if the contract was not breached. Hence, punitive damages are not awarded. They could ever remedies include the remedy of specific performance and injunctions. In case of the remedy of specific performance, the court makes an order under which the breaching party is directed to perform the contract in the way. That is specified by the court. Injunctions can be described as the orders, which are about the not to do something, for example, the party should not persist with the breach of the contract. Giving in to the facts that have been mentioned in this question, it can be said that the necessary elements, required for creating a valid contract are present between Brenda and Steven. An offer was made by to purchase the particular cloth and Brenda had accepted this offer by replying through the e-mail. Therefore it can be said that a valid contract was created between Brenda and Steven. As a result, Brenda can take action against Steven for the breach of contract. Similarly, the remedies that are available in case of a breach of contract will be available to Brenda.Brenda can take action against Steven for the breach of contract. Similarly, she may see the remedy of damages or the remedy of specific performance for the breach of contract by Steven.The issues that need to be decided in this question is if Bill and Mary have entered into a partnership agreement or if they were acting under a joint venture. Similarly, another issue is the need to differentiate between a joint ventu re and partnership. Rule: Generally, the terms joint venture and partnership are used interchangeably. Therefore, many people make the mistake regarding the difference between the two. A joint venture can be described as an agreement that exists between two or more persons or companies. In this case, the parties decide to work together for the achievement of a strategic goal. And at the same time, they maintain their separate businesses or entities. In case of a joint venture, each party is held liable for the debts that have been injured for the project and similarly at the end of the project, generally they divide the profits between themselves. Usually the relationship between the parties is governed by a written joint venture agreement. On the other hand, a partnership can be described as an ongoing relationship that exists between the parties. As against a company, a partnership does not a separate legal entity. Therefore, under the law, each partner is held liable for the actions of the other part ners. The major difference between a partnership and a joint venture is that while the partners are jointly and severally liable for each other, this is not the case in a joint venture. Another difference that exists between the two is that in case of a joint venture, there is no ongoing relationship between the parties and generally it has the definitive end. in the present case, the relationship between the parties, Bill and Mary, was limited to manufacturing and selling cardboard cartons made from recycled paper. Therefore, this relationship had a definitive end, and it was not an ongoing relationship. As a result, in the present case, the relationship between the parties can be described as a joint venture. It is significant to maintain the difference between a partnership and the joint venture, because the lock equity has imposed certain additional legal obligations on the partners. Therefore, the partners have certain additional fiduciary duties. Traditionally these duties are not considered to be applying to joint ventures.In this case, the relationship between Bill and Mary was that of a joint venture. The difference between the two is significant because certain additional duties have been imposed on the partners by the law.An exclusion clause can be described as a clause of the contract, generally in writing, according to which it is stated that a party to the contract cannot be held liable for a particular happening. For example, when a person is going to park his car in a car park by paying a fee, the owner of the car park will try to exclude his liability for any damage that may be caused to the vehicle in the car park. However, the law provides that an exclusion clause can be treated as valid only if such a clause has been properly incorporated in the contract and it is also necessary that the clause should not be contrary to the law. A clause is said to be properly incorporated in the contract only if it was not included in the contract after the formation of the contract. In case of a signed contract, generally it will be considered as being included in the contract. However, if a signed contract is not present, but there is a printed document or a signpost, which mentions the terms, such term can be included in the contract only if the term was brought to the notice of the other party before the formation of the contract. Application: In this question, Giovanni is an elderly immigrant from Italy. He had little fluency in English. Therefore, when Ben, the truck driver gave the contract to sign, Giovanni could not understand what was mentioned in the term of the contract. He had signed the contract when Ben told that it was standard authorization and signed by everyone. Under these circumstances, it can be said that the exclusion clause was not a part of the contract. As a result, QRZ Motors cannot rely on the exclusion clause and they cannot refuse to pay compensation to Giovanni. the issue in this question is related with the liability of the East End Four Corners Supermarket when John had slipped on the floor of the marketing on some grapes. John failed to see the grapes because he was busy in sending a text message was wife. On the other end, the store manager informed that the aisles were regularly inspected for spillages but on that day, the particular employee assigned to clean the spillage was o n leave. In order to establish the liability of the defendant under negligence, the claimant is required to establish that the defendant was liable for the injury and the defendant had the duty of care and the defendant was negligent (Fitzsimmons v Coles Supermarkets, 2013). While deciding this issue, the court considers what would have been done by any other reasonable person. Similarly, the court also looks into other circumstances like contributory negligence and consent (Jackson v McDonalds Australia Ltd, 2014). In such cases, the amount of damages awarded to the claimant depends on the seriousness of the injuries suffered by the claimant. in the present question, John had suffered an injury when he broke his ankle. He had slipped on some grapes in the fruit section. The supermarket can be held liable in negligence, as it had failed to see the spillage and clean it. The reason was that the employee who was given the duty to clean the spillage was on sick leave. However, John can also be held contributory negligent due to the reason that while walking, he was also sending a text message to his wife. Therefore we could not see the grapes on the floor. Conclusion: The supermarket is liable in negligence for the injuries suffered by John but the amount of compensation can be reduced due to the contributory negligence of John. In order to deal with such a situation, East End Four Corners Supermarket could have taken a negligence insurance. References Fitzsimmons v Coles Supermarkets [2013] NSWCA 273 Accounting, Jackson v McDonalds Australia Ltd [2014] NSWCA 162