Description
Explain the circumstances in which individuals are the 'holder in due course' under section 29 of the Bills of Exchange Act 1949. Support your answer with a decided case.
How to answer:
A few tips to
remember while drafting a case study in business law:
1. Read the case thoroughly and understand the
critical facts and issues.
2. Break the elements into subheadings like – case
brief, the facts of the case, issues/dispute, rationale and legal decision.
3. Start with a short description of the case
covering the crucial points of dispute.
4. Write the basic legal facts – names and the
legal situation of the parties.
5. Focus on the main points of dispute, study the
impact, and find possible solutions
6. In the rationale, talk about the appropriate
law to apply and why. Include the legal antecedents if required.
Example:
Explain what does the law state and then explain an example where it is applicable (example below for reff only)
Consumer Law Example
Mr. George Tillman recently returned a leased car to GM. However, they charged him for not returning the service history and the manual with the car. Tillman is not willing to pay anything back to the company since he claims that he has not received any service history or manual from the supplier from whom the car was leased. Give legal advice to Tillman.
Case Brief
A legal dispute between GM and George Tillman for not fulfilling the legal obligations under the lease agreement between the two.
Legal Rationale
- Under the lease agreement Tillman and GM, the former is liable to pay for any damage or loss caused to the property of the company.
- However, Tillman claims that there has been no violation of the law since he has not received any service history or manual from the supplier. He has written proof of that.
- Further, under consumer law, Tillman has a right to protect his consumer interests.
Legal Advice
- Tillman should write a letter to GM stating that he was unable to return the service history and car manual since he has not received them from the suppliers. Further, he has written proof of them.
- He must also write to the supplier stating that if the case goes up to the court of law, then he is under the law to implicate the supplier as the primary party responsible for the dispute.
Explanation & Answer
View attached explanation and answer. Let me know if you have any questions.
1
Williams v. Aries Fin., LLC
Student Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course Title
Date
2
Williams v. Aries Fin., LLC
Case Brief
In May 2009, Mrs. Williams Alavita, a complaint, filed her case, claiming that the
defendant Aries. LLC has violated federal and state policies. Her claim came out of a sequence
of events, in which Mrs. Williams is steady that the defendant persuaded her to refinance the
mortgage she brought at an overestimated loan amount in May 2006 and March 2007. The
refinancing process happened in the presence of DLJ Mortgage Capital, incorporation, and Wall
Street mortgage bankers limited (WSMB), which Mrs. Williams termed as the defendants
(Williams v. Aries fin., LLC., 2009). In particular, Mrs. Williams claims that WSMB highly
dishonored the law of the federal truth-in-lending act and the real estate settlement procedures
act. She said this because she is firm that WSMB’s actions were purely deceitful and
unacceptable. According to Williams, their actions convoluted in a civil conspiracy with DLJ
Mortgage capital incorporation to commit fraud. Furthermore, Williams claims that as a first-line
signee of her home's note and mortgage, DLJ is accountable for all arguments against WSMB.
The Facts of the Case
In July 2001, Mrs. Williams purchased a house or a mortgage for the first time. However,
in April 2004, Williams started to fall behind in terms of costs connected with repairs to the
brought mortgage and litigation costs. Later, after five months, Washington Mutual, the owner of
William’s first mortgage, started foreclosure engagements against Williams. Therefore, the
leading case arises from mortgages and the deed transfers implemented on May 2, 2006, and
March 21, 2007, subsequent to the commencement of the foreclosure action by Washington
Mutual (Williams v. Aries fin., LLC., 2009).
3
Issues/Dispute
The primary issue, in this case, is; wh...
Review
Review
