A contract is a legally binding arrangement
A contract is a legally binding arrangement made by two or more people or parties. Being legally binding implies that there are options available if the contract is broken. One of the most important aspects of a contract is that it is enforceable (McKendrick, 2014).
Remedies for breach of contract
Cassie Cardigan has been selected to serve as an auctioneer in our event, facilitating the sale of the dress to the highest bidder. The following discussion attempts to examine the remedies for breach of contract. In this case, there is an existence of a contract since the auctioneer gave both Pearl and Jade a chance to participate in bidding where Pearl emerged to be the top bidder of the dress. Both Pearl and Jade enters into a legally contract by bidding. This means that they agree to the terms and conditions of the contract in the auction. Candied should be sued by Pearl who is the plaintiff because she entered into a collateral contract. Based on the law, when the seller starts an auction, he or she is in collateral contract with all those bidders participating and is supposed to sell the property to the highest bidder (McKendrick, 2014). The seller failed to honour the terms and conditions set before an auction is opened hence a cause of action on the plaintiff.
Specific performance as an equitable remedy
Specific performance refers to an order issued by a court of law compelling a specific party to carry out its contractual obligations as stated in the previous agreement. Specific performance requires the innocent party to get the contractual obligations from the other party without any choice of paying damages. The Plaintiff should apply for an equitable remedy of specific performance forcing the defendant to carry out its function in the contract. This will eventually be granted by a court of law since the circumstances are justifying. An example of such a case is in Hasham Jiwa V. Zenab. The circumstances can be said to be justified contract is unique and the court can identify that plaintiff has the possibility of recovering what she was to receive if the contract was to be fulfilled (Decarolis, 2014). Cassie acted as an agent, and therefore she cannot sue or be sued for contracts he entered on behalf of the principal (Auction House).
Defenses for the defendant
However, Candied can use some of the following ways as a defence to her; the defendant can try to convince the court that there was an unintentional error that occurred in the contract thus making it unenforceable. Moreover, the defendant can claim that the plaintiff failed to fulfil his personal qualifications and that there is another person who bided higher than him thus they opted to give the top bidder. The defendant can convince the court that he or she will have a hefty burden if an action of specific performance is granted (Decarolis, 2014).
Conclusion
In conclusion, Pearl is supposed to have the dress because she emerged the top bidder. In accordance with the terms and conditions of an auction, the party who bids very high should be given the priority to purchase the property. The contract was enforceable since Pearl met all the requirements needed whereas Jade failed to fulfill all the conditions as she bided lower than Pearl. The defendant is supposed to honor the specific performance imposed on her because he breached the contract by ordering the agent to offer the dress to Jade who is her friend yet she was not the best bidder.
References
Decarolis, F. (2014). Awarding price, contract performance, and bids screening: Evidence from procurement auctions. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 6(1), 108-132.
McKendrick, E. (2014). Contract law: text, cases, and materials. Oxford University Press (UK).
