PVL 3702 LATEST EXAM PACK (A+ ASSURED)

QUESTION 1 A sues B based on a contract, which B denies exists. Which statement is INCORRECT? 1 Where prima facie proof exists that B agreed to the terms of an agreement, the evidentiary burden then shifts to B to show that despite this, consensus was not reached between the parties. 2 The contract can be proved through consensus. 3 The contract cannot be proved, based on reasonable reliance on the appearance of consensus. 4 In the pursuit to prove that the contract was concluded, a subjective state of mind can be provedwith objective evidence. (2) PLEASE NOTE: If you experience technical problems, of any kind, on the day of the examination and your examination answers are not submitted by the cut-off time, you will be marked as absent and automatically deferred to the October/November 2020 examination. No other type of submission of your examination answers will be accepted. It is advisable to print this page or make a screen capture for record purposes. A copy of this page will also be emailed to your myLife email account. Click on the radio button [the small circle] that corresponds to your answer for that question. Click on the Continue button to move to step 3. If you want to restart the assignment, click on Clear Form to remove all your selections and start from new. Step 3: Verify the answers to your multiple-choice assignment This screen presents a summary of all your answers. Use it as a final check. • Click on the Continue button to submit your assignment. If you do not click Continue, no submission action will take place. • If you want to redo the answers to the assignment, click Back to go back to the previous step. Step 4: Assessment submission report This is your proof that your examination answers were successfully submitted. If you do not see this screen, Unisa has not received your submission. • • • 4 CONFIDENTIAL Page 3 of 19 PVL3702 May/June 2020 QUESTION 2 X resides in Durban. He (X) applies for a job to company Y, in Johannesburg. X is interviewed for the job and subsequently receives a letter from the company informing him that his application was successful and that he was being offered the job, and this letter stated the terms of the offer. In response thereto, X informed the company that he accepts the offer of employment, and then resigns from his employment in Durban. He also then sells his house in Durban, and makes arrangements to have his furniture moved to his new home in Johannesburg. He then receives an apology letter from company Y, stating that the letter of appointment was sent to him by mistake, and that it was intended to be sent to another person who was interviewed by the selection committee. The contested issue is whether an enforceable agreement was concluded between the parties. A court hearing this matter is likely to find that 1 an enforceable agreement was not concluded. 2 an enforceable agreement was concluded based on the application of the will theory. 3 the expedition theory applies to these set of facts. 4 an enforceable agreement was concluded, based on the application of the doctrine of quasimutual assent. (2) QUESTION 3 Assume the same facts in question 2 above. A court hearing this matter is likely to find that company Y’s mistake was 1 material. 2 non-material. 3 an error in corpore. 4 an error in negotio. (2) QUESTION 4 Assume the same facts in question 2 above. A court hearing this matter is likely to find that company Y’s mistake was 1 reasonable, because one party was led reasonably to believe by the other party that a valid contract was concluded between them. 2 reasonable, based on the concurring expressions of intention of the parties. 3 reasonable because it (Company Y) made an innocent mistake. 4 not reasonable. (2) 5 CONFIDENTIAL Page 4 of 19 PVL3702 May/June 2020 QUESTION 5 X rents premises from Y for R10 000 per month. In terms of the lease agreement, the rental must be paid in advance on the first day of each month. The lease also contains a clause requiring that any variation of any of the terms of the lease (including this clause) has to be in writing and signed by both parties, for it to be legally binding. Later Y and X agree orally that X may pay the rental on the third day of each month, but this oral agreement is never reduced to writing and signed by the parties. Y accepts payment for two months on the third day of the month. In the next month of June when X makes payment on the third day, Y changes his mind and informs X, that X should vacate the premises because X has breached the contract by not paying the rental on the first day of June. For each option below, two aspects of contract law are mentioned. In which option below are both aspects MOST relevant to consider, based on these set of facts? 1 Statutory formalities prescribed by law and pacta sunt servanda. 2 Formalities stipulated by the parties and waiver. 3 The Shifren principle and formalities prescribed by law. 4 Non-variation clauses and stipulatio alteri. (2) QUESTION 6 Assume the same facts in question 5 above. If the Supreme Court of Appeal presently were to hear this dispute, it is likely to hold that 1 X did breach the contract of lease and Y did breach the subsequent oral agreement. Therefore, both parties are in equal guilt, entitling X as the possessor to remain on the premises. 2 Y did breach the oral agreement and therefore X is entitled to remain on the premises. 3 X did not breach the contract, because the oral agreement constitutes a binding compromise. 4 X did breach the contract, because the oral agreement is not legally binding. (2) QUESTION 7 X makes an offer to sel