- Discuss whether Article 2 applies to a blood transfusion given during an
operation. Assume for the purposes of this question that the patient will have to
pay for the blood supply.
Basing on the law regarding blood transfusions, it will be proper to ascertain that Article 2 applies in this scenario. In section two-105, a good has been described as everything that is movable during the duration of identification to the agreement for sale. Relating to this particular scenario, the good is the blood while the blood transfusion is a service. In the first part which is 2-106, a sale transaction incorporates the passing of the title from the entity selling which is the hospital to the entity buying which is the patient for certain charges. The article has also clearly stated that a single payment denotes the sale of goods and thus blood transfusion meets all the requirements making Article 2 to apply to blood transfusions given during operations.
- On Tuesday, a hobby shop owner receives an order for a custom toy train that will
need to be specially manufactured. That same day, the hobby shop owner begins
building the toy train. On Friday, the buyer calls to cancel the order. During the
conversation, the hobby shop owner insists on going through with the deal, and
tells the buyer (for the first time) that he has already started making the train. Is
the buyer legally bound by a contract to buy the toy train? Use UCC Article 2
sections to support your answer.
The law indicates that an agreement can be made in whatever form as long as the circumstances are reasonable (2206(1)(a),). Therefore, it is for the hobby shop owner to adhere to the custom order at the start to make the train. Therefore, by starting to make the train, he binds the buyer contractually unless the time that he will be reporting to the client is not reasonable. For this case, he notifies the client after three days of which it seems reasonable, and therefore the buyer is bound by the contract to buy the toy train. This can even be supported by Section 2-201(3)(a) which says that goods that have manufactured for a client are not good to be sold to others.
- Toro Lawnmoker sells “Ride-Along” mowers for $500 each wholesale. On
September 15 th , Johnson Hardware Co. placed a telephone order with Toro
Lawnmaker Co. for 100 “Ride-Along” mowers for delivery the following week.
When the mowers did not show up on time, Johnson called Toro to inquire as to
their status. Toro replied that there was no contract. Is the contract enforceable?
Explain.
The contract is not enforceable because there is no written agreement between the two parties yet the products cost more than $500. Section 2-201(1) indicates that an agreement made for goods that are charged some writing should accompany $500 or more.
- StockNet, Inc. is an Internet based company that provides full service securities
transactions to customers by e-mail and the World Wide Web. Periodically,
StoctNet posts the following advertisement on the web to stimulate immediate
business from new customers. “StockNet, a leader of Internet stock trading, invites new clients to make a one-
time stock purchase at no commission if the order is placed electronically through
the World Wide Web at: http://www.stocknet.com before the close of the market
today.”
Joe Netsurfer sees the post, and calls the broker by telephone and says that he
would like to purchase 100 shares of IBM. When he gets the purchase order
confirmation from StockNet, it includes a charge for commission. Joe is upset and
refuses to pay the commission, insisting that StockNet is contractually bound to
waive the commission fee based on the advertisement. (Assume for the purposes
of this question only that the sale of stock is covered by Article 2.)
Is Joe right?
According to section 2-206(1), t is illustrated that offers might be accepted in manners that are reasonable except in cases that they have been stated unambiguously. Basing on this scenario, the unambiguous language is that commissions can only be provided in situations whereby the client has placed an electronic order via the website. Joe failed to do this and instead placed his order through phone. Therefore, he is wrong because there was no such contract.
0
737