Search

In Australian law schools didactic pedagogies such as lectures devoted to the transmission of theory and knowledge to a largely passive audience still predominate. However, curriculum design embedding authentic learning pedagogies has been shown to be supportive of student learning. The challenge in adopting such curriculum design is how to offer situated cognitive learning opportunities on a large scale to increasingly diverse cohorts. This paper is a case study of a blended learning approach introduced into a second year undergraduate law unit to teach negotiation theory and practice to a large cohort of students studying in full-time, part-time, and distance external modes. This innovation was situated in an authentic simulated learning environment created through careful design of a high-fidelity scenario, utilising a narrative depicted by Second Life machinima video and simulated documentation. This approach resulted in greater student engagement and improved learning outcomes.

This is a time of regulatory reconsideration and transformation in Australia; when the long-held tradition of upholding ‘ipso facto’ clauses is under review as part of the Australian government’s innovation and reform agenda. The review forms part of the current conservative government’s policy to modernise, harmonise and strengthen Australia’s insolvency and restructuring laws, and to improve Australian business growth and economic prosperity. A proposal paper and model was released for public consultation with a submission deadline of May 2016. Subsequently, a draft exposure bill was released for consultation on 28 March 2017, seeking submissions by 24 April 2017.

Entertainment industries are among the largest in the world. The legal environment in which entertainment operates involves a confluence of eclectic laws such as those concerning free expression and its limits, those concerning intellectual property and their relationship with promoting, limiting and capitalising creativity, and the laws governing the contractual relationships between parties involved in entertainment productions.In this book, the authors analyse the major legal issues confronting those involved in entertainment in Australia, and provide clear, accessible statements of the current legal principles involved. They enable readers to understand what the law is and how it is likely to apply in particular situations.The book uses an accessible, reader-friendly style making it suitable for those involved in entertainment industries, legal practitioners and students of entertainment law. [book description]

Executive Summary There are a large number of Chapters in the Trans-Pacific Partnership dealing with agriculture, food security, farming, and plant intellectual property. As a result, it is a complex equation, assessing the benefits and costs for the sector under the Trans-Pacific Partnership. The traditional provisions upon market access in respect of agricultural markets have received a mixed response. The United States Department of Agriculture has argued that the deal will result in the elimination of tariffs: Under the TPP agreement, most tariffs on U.S. agricultural exports will be eliminated. For Japan, once the TPP agreement is implemented, over 50 percent of U.S. farm product exports (by value) will receive duty-free treatment immediately. These products include grapes, strawberries, walnuts, almonds, raisins, sweet corn, lactose, certain fruit juices, and most pet foods. Canada will eliminate its tariffs on whey and margarine. Vietnam will eliminate tariffs on over 90 percent of current U.S. trade in five years or less. Malaysia will immediately eliminate tariffs on over 90 percent of current U.S. trade. New Zealand will immediately eliminate tariffs on nearly 80% of current U.S. trade, and Brunei will do the same for all U.S. trade. The United States Department of Agriculture argues: ‘For some products, preferential market access will be provided through the creation of TRQs, which provide access for a specified quantity of imports at a preferential tariff rate, generally zero’. It notes: ‘Japan will provide access through TRQs for rice, wheat and wheat products, barley and barley products, malt, whey, milk powder, butter, evaporated milk, condensed milk, vegetables, sugar-containing products, glucose, fructose, starch, corn & potato starch, and inulin’. It observes: ‘Canada will provide access through TRQs for dairy, poultry and egg products’. In addition, ‘Malaysia will provide access through TRQs for fluid milk, poultry and eggs’, and ‘the United States will provide access through TRQs for sugar and dairy products.’ Moreover, there will be limited safeguards to help farmers adjust to potential import surges. However, the agreement has not necessarily won favour with all quarters of the farming sector in the United States. The National Farmers Union senior vice president Chandler Goule: ‘It's very obvious after reading through the text that this is another cookie cutter free trade agreement’. President Roger Johnson testified before the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) and warned that TPP will ultimately disappoint rural America because it is modelled after the failed agreements of the past. He commented: Unfortunately for this nation, when it comes to these enormous trade deals, the list of promises is quite long but the list of actual deliverables is often very short. Instead of helping curb the U.S. trade deficit, agreements like the TPP are actually making it worse.” Collectively, these massive trade deals have done immense damage to the economy, draining economic growth and jobs from American families. That is why the primary goal of these trade pacts should be to achieve an overall balance of trade, and on that standard, these deals are failing. Johnson also warned that the Trans-Pacific Partnership and previous trade deals fall woefully short on enforcement tools to prevent foreign governments from cheating the system to give their businesses unfair competitive advantages – through measures such as currency manipulation. In Australia, there has been debate over whether the Trans-Pacific Partnership provides for comprehensive market access in respect of agriculture. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade argues that the deal will be of great benefit to Australian agriculture: Australia exported around $16 billion worth of agricultural goods to TPP countries in 2014-15, representing close to 35 per cent of Australia’s total exports of these products. The TPP will eliminate tariffs on more than $4.3 billion of Australia’s dutiable exports of agricultural goods to TPP countries upon entry into force of the Agreement. A further $2.1 billion of Australia’s dutiable exports will receive significant preferential access through new quotas and tariff reductions. However, there has been a lack of independent economic analysis of such claims about the trade benefits to agriculture of the agreement. There has been concern about protectionism by certain countries in certain fields. The United States protectionism in respect of sugar has been a sore point in the Trans-Pacific Partnership – much as it was with the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement. Likewise, New Zealand has argued that the agreement will benefit its local agriculture. There has been some debate, though, about how New Zealand will fare against its rivals and competitors. In Canada, there were dramatic protests by dairy farmers over the Trans-Pacific Partnership, with tractors and cows encircling the Canadian Parliament. Stephen Harper’s Conservative Government promised a large compensation package to dairy farmers. Justin Trudeau’s New Liberal Government is engaging in consultations over the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Obviously agriculture will be a sensitive issue. Professor Michael Geist of the University of Ottawa has considered the Trans-Pacific Partnership and agriculture. He noted, ‘The agricultural sector is often pointed to as a likely winner with the expectation that more open markets will result in Canadian farmers selling more beef, pork, canola, and other products.’ Geist observed: ‘Those predictions may prove true, but based on what the Standing Committee on International Trade has heard, there are many other agricultural sectors that stand to lose as a result of the deal.’ Geist commented: The dairy industry is the most obvious sector that projects losses in the billions of dollars. Indeed, the Conservative government promised billions of taxpayer dollars as compensation for those losses. When the dairy industry appeared before the committee, it made it clear that it expects the Liberal government to honour the same payout, arguing that the compensation – which amounts to $150,000 per dairy farmer – is part of the agreement (even if not actually part of the TPP text). In fact, the compensation extends to other supply managed sectors such as the chicken industry, which is also projecting losses due to the TPP (and CETA). In all, these various sectors expect $2.4 billion from an income guarantee program, $1.5 billion from quota-value guarantee program, $450 million for a processor modernization program, and $15 million for a market development initiative. Geist observed: ‘In other sectors, the impact of the TPP is modest at best’. He stressed: ‘For example, the Canadian Vintners’ Association appeared before the committee to discuss the impact on the Canadian wine industry. With low tariffs already in place in several TPP countries, the impact will be modest unless Vietnam suddenly starts drinking a lot of Canadian wine.’ Even more so, in Japan, there has been a fierce debate as to how the Trans-Pacific Partnership will affect agriculture, forestry, and fisheries. The Trans-Pacific Partnership also contains a Chapter – Chapter 7 – which deals with sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures. It promotes the development and application of SPS measures in a risk-based, scientifically sound manner, while ensuring that regulatory agencies in the United States and other TPP member countries are able to protect food safety and plant and animal health. There has been much controversy in this area in respect of the topic of food safety. From an Australian perspective, there was a significant scare in respect of Nanna’s Berries, which had been sourced from China: see the Australian Department of Health The Intellectual Property Chapter in the Trans-Pacific Partnership addresses a number of forms of plant intellectual property – including plant breeders’ rights, plant patents, geographical indications, and data protection in respect of agricultural chemicals. There has been insightful work on this topic by Hannah Brennan and Burcu Kilic. See Hannah Brennan and Burcu Kilic, ‘Freeing Trade at the Expense of Local Crop Markets? A Look at the Trans-Pacific Partnership’s New Plant Related Intellectual Property Rights from a Human Rights Perspective’, Harvard Human Rights Journal, April 2015. The Investment Chapter in the Trans-Pacific Partnership raises a number of concerns about the regulation of food. There has been a particular interest in the impact of investor-state dispute settlement on various food labelling initiatives. Esther Han, the consumer rights journalist for the Sydney Morning Herald, has noted concerns amongst consumer advocates about how investor clauses with affect food labelling initiatives – such as laws that require food companies to list ingredients, country of origin statements, and health and nutritional information on food packaging: Esther Han, ‘Food labelling and product safety laws in jeopardy under TPP says Choice’, The Sydney Morning Herald, 11 March 2016. In my research, I have looked at the multi-faceted battle over GM food labelling. This submission draws upon published research – namely the book chapter: Matthew Rimmer, 'Just Label It: Consumer Rights, GM Food Labelling, and International Trade', in Charles Lawson and Berris Charnley (ed.), Intellectual Property and Genetically Modified Organisms: A Convergence in Laws, Farnham (Surrey): Ashgate Publishing, March 2015, 143-184. There have also been some larger issues in respect of labor rights and farming. The then United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food Olivier de Schutter and Kaitlin Cordes have raised concerns about the impact of the Trans-Pacific Partnership on the right to food. They have analysed how the agreement will affect agriculture, farming, and food security. They are particularly concerned about how the agreement will operate in respect of developing countries. Recommendation 1 - There is a need for a proper comprehensive assessment of the economic impacts of the Trans-Pacific Partnership in respect of farming, agriculture, and food security. Recommendation 2 - The Intellectual Property Chapter of the Trans-Pacific Partnership raises significant issues for agriculture – with text on plant breeders’ rights, patents, trade marks, geographical indications, and data protection for agricultural chemicals. Recommendation 3 - The Investment Chapter of the Trans-Pacific Partnership will raise major issues in respect of agriculture, farming, and food security. The UNCTAD ISDS Navigator reveals that there have been 14 disputes over crop and animal production; 8 disputes over forestry and logging; and 4 disputes in respect of fishing and aquaculture as at March 2016. In addition, there has been 25 disputes over the manufacture of food products, and several conflicts over beverages. Recommendation 4 - There has been significant concern as to how the Trans-Pacific Partnership will impact upon public regulation in respect of food labelling. There has been significant conflict in respect of GM food labelling, country of origin, nutrition labelling such as with Health Stars, and palm oil labelling. Moreover, there has been significant trade disputes over eco-labels – such as the dispute between Mexico and the United States of America over the Dolphin-Safe Ecolabel. Recommendation 5 - The Trans-Pacific Partnership also contains a Chapter which deals with sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures. It is worthwhile considering how the trade agreement will affect the regulation of food safety across the Pacific Rim. Recommendation 6 - The Trans-Pacific Partnership should be the subject of a human rights assessment – particularly in respect of the right to food.

Stephen Corones in The Australian Consumer Law, explains in a detailed yet accessible treatment the substantive rights and remedies of consumers, and the obligations of traders under the Australian Consumer Law (ACL). The ACL commenced on 1 January 2011 and it has been a far reaching national reform. As a result of the ACL there is now one uniform consumer protection law that applies in all jurisdictions throughout Australia and across all sectors of the economy. This book explains the scope and importance of the statutory causes of action created by the ACL. It examines how the general and specific protections inter-relate, the scope for overlap, and why each provision is necessary to provide complete consumer protection. Since the last edition over three years ago, The Australian Consumer Law third edition has been extensively reworked and updated to take account of the many changes in the law that have occurred during this time. The third edition includes commentary on new legislation, including the Treasury Legislation Amendment (Small Business and Unfair Contract Terms) Act 2015 (Cth) which will extend the general protection against unfair terms to contracts with small businesses.

Supermarkets in Australia may have substantial market power as buyers in wholesale markets for grocery products. They may also have substantial bargaining power in negotiating contracts with their suppliers of grocery products. The Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) (CCA) regulates misconduct by supermarkets as customer/acquirers in three ways. First, s 46(1) of the CCA prohibits the ‘taking advantage’ of buyer power for the purpose of damaging a competitor, preventing entry or deterring or preventing competitive conduct. Secondly, s 21 of the ACL prohibits unconscionable conduct in business–to–business transactions. Thirdly, Pt IVB of the CCA provides for the promulgation of mandatory and voluntary industry codes of conduct. Since 1 July 2015 the conduct of supermarkets as customer/acquirers has been regulated by the Food and Grocery Industry Code of Conduct. This article examines these three different approaches. It considers them against the background of the misconduct at issue in ACCC v Coles Supermarkets Australia Pty Ltd which the ACCC chose to litigate as an unconscionable conduct case, rather than a misuse of market power case. The article also considers the strengths and weaknesses of each of the three approaches and concludes that while the three approaches address different problems there is scope for overlap and all three should be retained for compete coverage.

The decision of Evans v Robcorp Pty Ltd[2014] QSC 26 is of interest as being an instance where the defence of hardship, in this case, financial hardship, was successfully pleaded in defence to a summary application for specific performance of a contract for the sale of land. Equity has always recognised the defence of hardship in response to an action for specific performance which, as an equitable remedy, might be refused in the discretion of the Court (Hewett v Court (1983) 149 CLR 639 at 664). However, whilst the remedy is discretionary, there are certain accepted principles which have guided the courts in their application of this defence to particular facts. It is not a blanket defence to a claim for specific performance where the buyer simply does not have the funds to complete the contract at the time when settlement is called for. Occasionally, a radical change in, say for instance, the health of the defendant between contract and completion, perhaps coupled with a long delay by a seller in calling for completion not being the fault of the buyer might enliven the defence (Patel v Ali [1984]1 Ch 283)

A challenge for regulators and the courts has been establishing the boundary between behaviour is exclusionary and should be condemned under s 46 of the then Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) (TPA), now s 46 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) (CCA), and behaviour that is not exclusionary and might even be pro-competitive. This boundary can be especially difficult to draw in the case of entry deterring strategies. Section 46(1) prohibits corporations with a substantial degree of market power from taking advantage of that market power for one of the statutorily proscribed purposes which include preventing the entry of a person into that or any other market. Section 45(2) separately prohibits corporations from making and giving effect to contracts arrangements and understandings that have the purpose, effect or likely effect of substantially lessening competition in a market. The latest case in which the ACCC has failed to satisfy the s 46 criteria is the decision of Greenwood J in ACCC v Cement Australia Pty Ltd [2013] FCA 909 (Cement Australia case). Final orders were published in a separate judgment, in ACCC v Cement Australia Pty Ltd [2014] FCA 148 (28 February 2014). The case concerned an entry deterring strategy, namely the pre-emptive buying of input factors in an upstream market to protect an incumbent with substantial market power in a downstream market and to prevent new entry in the downstream market. Greenwood J found that while Cement Australia Pty Ltd, formerly known as Queensland Cement Ltd (QCL), had substantial market power, its conduct in entering into the pre-emptive contracts was not a contravention of s 46, because Cement Australia had not “taken advantage” of its market power. However, since Cement Australia’s purpose in entering into the pre-emptive contracts was anti-competitive, they were held to contravene s 45(2) of the TPA. The purpose of this Note is to consider only the reasons for judgment in the Cement Australia case in relation to the “taking advantage” element. The judgment was handed down on 10 September 2013. The final hearing date was 15 July 2011, so it was long-awaited. At 714 pages, it is carefully drafted.

China has opened its doors to the world so understanding Chinese contract law is crucial to succeeding in international business transactions. The United States and China are both signatories to the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG), and both nations have declared that neither are bound under Article 1(1)(b), which means that if a contractual conflict arises, the domestic law of either nation may apply when interpreting the contract. China only requires offer and acceptance whereas the United States requires mutual assent and consideration, so contract interpretation may be problematic. Beyond offer and acceptance, Chinese contract formation law has also been heavily influenced by Confucianism, Communism, and China's desire to enter the World Trade Organization (WTO). This article addresses the background and impact of past, present, and future influences in Chinese contract law and discusses several imminent problems that still exist with Chinese law on contract formation.

The fourth edition of Contract Law provides a comprehensive review of the principles of contract law. Complex topics are explained in a clear and accessible style that and illustrated by succinct cases. This text is also available with a casebook which gives students access to an expanded selection of primary and secondary materials.

This case book contains the essential sections of the most significant cases in Australian contract law. Ready access to this collection of cases enables students to experience the law through the judges’ own words, and to develop the skills of interpreting and analysing cases in order to refine their understanding of the law. Excerpts from important statutes and writings are also included.

The significance of the proposed name of a building to buyers of units off the plan has received recent attention in Queensland and the ACT with differing results. In Gough v South Sky Investments Pty Ltd the Queensland Court of Appeal concluded that the name of the building was not an essential term of the contract and rejected a claim by a number of buyers to terminate their contracts because of the change of name from Oracle to Peppers. In contrast, Rares J in the Federal Court decision of Madison Constructions Pty Ltd v Empire Building Group (ACT) Pty Ltd considered that the name of the building in a proposed development could potentially form the basis of misleading conduct about the association of the seller with a particular development corporation.

Copyright © 2011 LexisNexis. This article is made available per the publisher's Content Sharing policy., The recent decision of the full bench of the Federal Court in Leveraged Equities Ltd v Goodridge1 has unanimously overturned the contentious first instance decision of Rares J2 and, in doing so, has restored clarity to the legal principles governing assignment and novation of contracts. Although the decision centred on the enforcement of margin lending arrangements and the proper construction of an ambiguously drafted contract, the case has wider implications for syndicated loans, securitisations and commercial transactions generally. The first instance decision caused much consternation in financial and legal circles, as it appeared to challenge existing legal principles and practice regarding the novation and assignment of contracts. Although several commentators suggested that the statements from the Goodridge decision should be confined to the specific facts, there was concern that if applied more broadly, the Goodridge decision undermined the validity of existing loan transfers, securitisations and other commercial transactions. The appeal decision has put such fears to rest, while providing a cogent and authoritative summation of the Australian law on novation and assignments, in line with both English and US authorities. Nevertheless, there are some aspects of the decision which may require further clarification.

In this book, Professor Sutton traces the legal history of the act of kissing in civil society. The kiss, Sutton explains, has been employed to complete legal transactions, like the transfer of property. The kiss has also been involved in contracts, peace agreements, and plea bargains. Finally, the kiss has been prohibited as obscene in at least one major film. This book provides an entertaining and illustrated historical and cultural tour of the changes in the legal implications of the kiss throughout civil society.

© 2010 Dr. Katy Eloise Barnett, The award of the remedy of an account of profits (or ‘disgorgement damages’) for breach of contract is justifiable in some circumstances, and it can be situated within orthodox contract law principle and cases. The primary goal of disgorgement damages is to deter a defendant from unilaterally breaching his contract in certain circumstances. It is important to note that disgorgement damages will not be available for all breaches of contract: the availability of disgorgement depends upon the nature of the plaintiff’s interest in performance of the contractual obligations and the availability of a substitute performance (either through an award of compensatory damages or through an award of specific relief). In addition, disgorgement damages have a punitive rationale. Thus, a defendant will only be deserving of punishment when his breach was advertent. Disgorgement damages are available in two categories of case: the ‘second sale’ cases, where the defendant breaches his contract with the plaintiff to make a more profitable contract with a third party; and the ‘agency problem’ cases, where the defendant promises the plaintiff he will not do a certain thing, and the plaintiff finds it difficult to supervise the performance. Concurrent breach of contract and fiduciary duty cases make up the core of this latter category, but it also encompasses some breach of negative covenant cases. Disgorgement may be full or partial. Awards of so-called or ‘reasonable fee damages’ for breach of contract are best understood as examples of partial disgorgement rather than as ‘restitutionary damages’. Courts award partial disgorgement because typically, specific relief is still possible, but the court does not award it for discretionary reasons. By contrast, in the full disgorgement cases, typically, the defendant has rendered it impossible for the plaintiff to be awarded her right to performance, and thus the deterrent and punitive considerations merit an award at the higher end of the scale. There is an overlap between ‘reasonable fee’ damages and awards for so-called ‘skimped performance’. Ordinarily, however, it will not be necessary to award disgorgement damages for an expense saved because compensatory damages will still be adequate. The primary question for the court in most cases is which measure should be utilised (difference in value or rectification cost). In rare cases, it may be necessary to award disgorgement damages, particularly where compensatory damages are inadequate and the purpose of the contract was to avoid a risk. Equitable bars to relief, such as hardship, laches and acquiescence and ‘clean hands’ should be adopted in relation to disgorgement damages. Similarly, allowances for skill and effort should be applied to disgorgement damages for breach of contract. The justification for this rests on notions of desert (namely, that the plaintiff does not deserve relief and that the defendant does not deserve to be punished) or on notions of mercy (that because of his particular circumstances, the defendant should not have to disgorge his profit).

A Commentary on the Property Law Act 1974 Queensland

© 2006 Quan Hien Nguyen., What makes real life contractual arrangements? How does the law influence real life contractual arrangements? These are everyday questions for businesspeople and commercial lawyers. The traditional ‘imperative’ view of law assumes that business people contract ‘in the shadow of the law’ and contractual arrangements conform to what the law says. But empirical studies on contract practice suggest that contract law may, in fact, play a very insignificant role in real life contractual arrangements. This thesis provides a sociological view of the role of contract law in real life contractual arrangements in the context of the Vietnamese market. Specifically, this thesis applies an institutional law & economics approach to investigate how social structures of the market influence contractual arrangements to marginalize contract law in the Vietnamese market. Drawing on two surveys of contract behaviour in the Vietnamese market, this thesis finds that real life contractual arrangements respond to the institutional structure of the market as a whole, rather than only ‘the shadow of the law’. Institutional changes in the Vietnamese market suggest that there exists a merchant law system, constituted of traditional moral norms and social structures in the market. This merchant law system continues to order contractual arrangements in the market, despite the introduction of a transplanted contract law system. Disagreeing with the imperative approach, this thesis claims that contract law reform should conform to the institutional structure of the market to reduce transaction costs of contracting and to provide an effective framework for real life contractual arrangements.

China has been the focus of much academic and business scrutiny of late. Its economic climate is changing and its huge new market opportunities seem quite tantalizing to the would-be 'technology entrepreneur'. But China's market is a relatively immature one; it is still in the process of being opened up to real competition. The corollary of this is that, at this stage of the transitional process, there is still significant State control of market function. This article discusses Chinese competition law, the technology transfer system, how the laws are being reformed and how the technology entrepreneur fares under them. The bottom line is that while opportunities beckon, the wise entrepreneur will nevertheless continue to exercise caution.

It is the purpose of this article to examine the means curently available to judges to achieve a workable balance between providing appropriate consumer protection to signatories of standard form contractors while still retaining adequate respect for the sanctity of contract, and, based on this analysis, to determine whether a significantly greater scope of contract (re)construction is likely to become the norm in most common law jurisdictions in the coming decades.

This article outlines the tole of copyright, patent and trademark law along with competition and contract law in shaping the boundaries of digital property.

This article examines the importance of accurate classification and identification of risk with particular reference to the problem of adverse selection. It is argued that, historically, this concern was the paramount consideration influencing standard form contract formation and disclosure laws. The scope of its relevance today however is less apparent in that contemporary insurance contracting is conducted in a vastly different environment from that which prevailed at the time Lloyd's was better known as a coffee house. Accordingly, the second part of this article looks at the contemporary framework of information disclosure and those dynamics within it designed to elicit information weighing on risk forecasting : specifically, (a) direct inquiry and testing requirements; (b) signaling - or incentive based structuring of insurance contractual and (c) bargaining in the shadow of the utmost good faith doctrine. Finally, certain conclusions arising out of contemporary and historical economic considerations underpinning disclosure in insurance law are outlined.

After briefly summarizing the primary tenets of and the legal relations resulting from issuance of a credit, this Article will examine the transfer of those relations by act of the parties to a credit from the point of view of general contract law. Next, this Article will review the intersection of letter-of-credit law with other laws of special application, such as corporate succession and bankruptcy, where the legal relations created by a credit are said to have been transferred not by an act of a party to the credit, but by operation of law. Lastly, the proposed revisions of the UCC and the UCP affecting the rules of transfer will be previewed.

Section 2-702(1) of the Uniform Commercial Code provides that “[w]here the seller discovers the buyer to be insolvent he may refuse delivery except for cash . . . ." Whether the seller is under any duty to give notice to the buyer that delivery will not be made except for cash, however, is a question not addressed by this section. In addition, the few courts which have construed this aspect of section 2-702(1) are not in agreement. Though the right to refuse delivery except for cash was also a common law remedy, neither is a uniform resolution of this problem to be found in the pre-Code cases. Yet, it is not difficult to hypothesize a situation in which the answer to this question may determine liability. For instance, the seller and the buyer agree to a sale of goods on credit, and subsequently the seller discovers buyer to be insolvent. The seller does not notify the buyer that he is withholding delivery except for cash. Is either party in breach if the goods are not delivered on the date called for by the contract? This comment examines the varying judicial responses to this problem and attempts to assess them in light of general common law and Code principles.

Notice that a creditor is an assignee was sufficient to meet the requirements of the Truth In Lending Act and Regulation Z. Louisiana will not recognize a foreign divorce of one of its residents serving as an active duty military member by reasoning that divorce is based on domicile. A lease agreement was not a disguised credit agreement under the Truth In Lending Act because the lessee was only obligated to make one rent payment, which was substantially lower than the value of the rented item.

Low-income consumers are often at a disadvantage when subject to deceptive business practices. These consumers find little protection in the courts due to the high costs of litigation and often low claims amount that is in dispute. Often, the only way for such plaintiffs to reach federal court would be to lump several claims together in a consumer class action suit. This case note discusses Kugler v. Romain, a case in which the New Jersey Supreme Court held that when unconscionable prices render sales contracts invalid, the Attorney General may act for the entire benefit of the class of such persons under the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act and not merely for those who testified at trial.

This article discusses how to uphold an oral contract using partial performance and how to take a parole sale of land and an oral contract out of the statute of frauds. It analyzes the elements of partial performance in Texas: payment, possession, and improvements. Lastly, the article explains the presumption of fraud in partial performance cases and suggests different ways to change the elements of partial performance in Texas.