代写被开除：澳大利亚合同法和消费者法
丹尼拥有一辆旧的但很有价值的奔驰车，他想用现代的设计给它新的外观和感觉。她想要的照顾有完整的室内装潢。她在网上找到了附近一家名为“古董室内装潢商”的作坊。丹妮把她的车开到古董店，询问有关工作经验、工作质量等方面的情况。她清楚地提到汽车需要恢复到原来的状态。丹尼还展示了一些照片，以确保汽车看起来像那些照片工作后。丹尼被告知，该公司的交易人员都是“一流的”，其中卡尔曾在德国设计过奔驰汽车。她被告知卡尔将负责给她的汽车装璜。丹妮同意让Vintage公司承担这项工作，并签署了一份名为“协议”的文件。协议中有一条规定，每一项工作都要小心谨慎，但葡萄酒厂对货物的任何损坏或完成的工作中的任何缺陷不承担责任。特此排除所有保证。还有人提到卡尔会照顾好孩子。
车一修好，丹尼就开始抱怨工作质量差，而且车的外观也不像图片中所示。此外，她还指出，只有当主管卡尔去度假时，车才完成了一半。丹妮对这件作品并不满意，所以她想对Vintage采取行动来解决这个问题。
代写被开除：澳大利亚合同法和消费者法
合同条款及其效力
规则
澳大利亚合同法和澳大利亚消费者法对合同的成立、效力审查等作出了必要的规定。要使合同生效，双方的协议是很重要的。对于有效的合同，要约必须由一方当事人提出，另一方当事人必须接受要约。正如在对第一个问题的讨论中所提出的，审议在这里成为一个非常关键的因素。在分析合同效力时，法院将适用对价规则。例如，考虑Beaton v McDevitt7案例。这个案件是在考虑的基础上作出判决的。被告作出承诺，他们将转让财产，而提交法庭的问题是，这种关于转让的承诺是否可以被视为对价。法院认为，对价是基于意图而存在的，因此具有价值。
第二，在对合同效力进行分析时，法院会给出适当的通知。法律关系，如合同，是由于两个或两个以上的当事人首先有兴趣建立法律关系而形成的。因此，建立法律关系的意愿对法院来说很重要。对合同条款的考虑和意图表明，双方知道他们正在讨论的有关合同条款的内容，并愿意订立这些条款。例如，在Rose和Frank & Co诉Crompton9一案中，法院能够确定，由于他们没有意图，他们也没有合同。在目前的情况下，双方都有合法的协议签署，因此，如果没有完全满意地完成工作，将导致退款或重新做整个工作，不收取额外费用。在这种情况下，错误来自年份，因此他们要承担相同的责任。也有过失违约的工作。
代写被开除：澳大利亚合同法和消费者法
Dani owned old but valuable Mercedes car and wanted to give it new look and new feel with modern design. She wanted the care to have complete upholstery. She identified online one workshop nearby ‘Vintage Upholsterers”. Dani took her car to vintage and enquired all about experiences, quality of work and more. She clearly mentioned that the car is needed to restore to its original condition. Dani also showed some pictures to make sure that the car looks like those pictures after the work. Dani was told that the firm’s trades people were ‘first class’ and that one of them, Carl, had worked on Mercedes cars in Germany. She was told that Carl would be put in charge of upholstering her car. Dani agreed to having Vintage undertake the work and she signed a document headed ‘Agreement’. The agreement had one clause that every single care is taken while doing the work but the Vintage is not responsible for any damage to goods or for any defect in work completed. All warranties are hereby excluded.” This was also mentioned that Carl would take care of the care.
As soon the car got ready by Vintage, Dani complained about the poor work and the car did not look like as shown in given pictures. Also, she identified that the car is half done only when the supervisor Carl left for holiday. Dani is not happy with the work and so she wanted to have actions against Vintage for the remedy of the issue.
代写被开除：澳大利亚合同法和消费者法
Contract terms and their validity
Rule
Australian Contract law and the Australian Consumer law makes the provisions needed for contract formation, validity checks and more. For contract to be in effect, agreement between the parties is important. For a valid contract, an offer has to be made by one of the parties, and another party has to accept the offer . As presented in the discussions of the first issue, consideration becomes a very critical element here. In analysing for the validity of a contract courts will apply the consideration rule . For instance, consider the Beaton v McDevitt7 case. The case was adjudged based on consideration. A promise was made by the respondent that they would transfer the property and the issue brought into court was whether such a promise on a transference could be considered as consideration. The court held that consideration existed based on intent and hence it had value .
Second to consideration, the intention is given due notice by courts when it comes to analysing for the validity of a contract. Legal relations as in the case of a contract is formed because two or more parties are interested to enter into the legal relation in the first place. So intention to enter into legal relations is important for the court. Consideration and intent shows that the parties were aware of what they were discussing with respect to terms of contract and were willingly entering into them . For instance, as seen in the case of Rose and Frank & Co v Crompton9, the court was able to establish that since they had no intention they had no contract as well . In the current scenario also, there is legal agreement sign both of them and hence for not completing the work with full satisfaction will lead for refund or redo the entire work again without extra charges. Here in this case, the fault is from the Vintage and hence they are liable for the same. There is also breach of negligence of work.
