Issue 18/08/2011 Revision Date 25/06/2018 Form No. ECT/ACA/F03.

04

Group Work # 2

Dat
e / / Time:
Marks
Student’s Name & /
ID Jihan Khellah / BAF1802042
Student’s Name & /
ID ZAINAB Al Jaberi / BAF1802078
Student’s Name & /
ID Fatema Al Marzooqi / DAF1909008
Student’s Name & /
ID Ghaneya Al Remeithi / BAF1809022
Student’s Name & /
ID Jamila Omar / BAF1809090
Student’s Name & /
ID Nada Ali Saif/ BAF1909012

Course Name Business law

Course Code Bus 305

Semester Fall / 2020

Instructor’s Name Dr. Nizar Yousef Al-Abed

Case 1 2 3 Total
C D
Question A B
4. 2.5 3.5
Point 4.5 15
5
Group Work Mark
Issue 18/08/2011 Revision Date 25/06/2018 Form No. ECT/ACA/F03.04

Group Work # 2
Note: This Group work accounts for 15% of the student’s final grade.

CASE 1
Bilateral versus Unilateral Contracts. William Greene began working for Grant Building, Inc., in
1959. Greene allegedly agreed to work at a pay rate below union scale in exchange for a promise that
Grant would employ him “for life.” In 1975, Oliver Realty, Inc., took over the management of Grant
Building. Oliver Realty’s president assured former Grant employees that existing employment
contracts would be honored. During that same year, Greene explained the terms of his agreement to an
Oliver Realty supervisor. The supervisor stated that he would look into the matter but never got back
to Greene. After twenty-four years of service, Greene was fired by the new owners of the business.
Greene sued Oliver Realty for breach of a unilateral contract. [Greene v. Oliver Realty, Inc., 363
Pa.Super. 534, 526 A.2d 1192 (1987)].

A) Discuss fully whether Greene and Oliver Realty had a unilateral contract. (4.5
marks)

Yes, Oliver Realty and Greene had entered into a unilateral contract (a promise for an act of
performance) under which Greene was the offeree and he might accept the offer only after
fulfilling the contract's requirements (working at a pay rate below union scale). It is finished in
order to keep a pledge, although Grant Building Inc. was involved. Grant Building had
promised him something. The new Grant Building president later provided additional
assurances, although they were still in accordance with the contract. The agreement to carry
out a pledge was established with Greene and Grant Building, among other parties.

The new management was forced to act, nonetheless, based on the new president's promise
to uphold the terms of the current contracts. As a result, based on this, we can conclude that
although some difficulties since his promise and unilateral contract were with the grant
building but the new President's guarantee ensured that existing contracts will be followed
which was a unilateral contract for Greene.
Issue 18/08/2011 Revision Date 25/06/2018 Form No. ECT/ACA/F03.04

Group Work # 2

CASE 2
Shrink-Wrap Agreements. 1-A Equipment Co. signed a sales order to lease Accware 10 User NT
software, which is made and marketed by ICode, Inc. Just above the signature line, the order stated:
“Thank you for your order. No returns or refunds will be issued for software license and/or services.
All sales are final. Please read the End User License and Service Agreement.” The software was
delivered in a sealed envelope inside a box. On the outside of the envelope, an “End User Agreement”
provided in part, “BY OPENING THIS PACKAGING, CLICKING YOUR ACCEPTANCE OF THE
AGREEMENT DURING DOWNLOAD OR INSTALLATION OF THIS PRODUCT, OR BY
USING ANY PART OF THIS PRODUCT, YOU AGREE TO BE LEGALLY BOUND BY THE
TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT. . . . This agreement will be governed by the laws in force in the
Commonwealth of Virginia .  .  . and exclusive venue for any litigation shall be in Virginia.” Later,
dissatisfied with the software, 1-A filed a suit in a Massachusetts state court against ICode, alleging
breach of contract and misrepresentation. ICode asked the court to dismiss the case on the basis of the
“End User Agreement.” [1-A Equipment Co. v. ICode, Inc., 43 UCC Rep.Serv.2d 807 (Mass.Dist.
2000)]
B) Is the agreement enforceable? Should the court dismiss the suit? Why or why not? (4.5
marks)

• The agreement is enforceable, as it is a shrink-wrapped contract with clauses inside a

box that must be clicked by the buyer in order to accept all specified conditions.
 The contract had not been broken.
 This agreement will be regulated by the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and
Virginia shall serve as the sole forum for any disputes, as specified in the conditions.
Additionally, the 1-A filed the lawsuit in a Massachusetts state court, not a Virginia
court.
Issue 18/08/2011 Revision Date 25/06/2018 Form No. ECT/ACA/F03.04

Group Work # 2

Case study: 3
Danté
After months of searching for a weekend job, Danté, who is Black, finally got an interview with the
owner of a busy car wash and gas station. The owner seemed reluctant to hire him, but Danté managed
to win him over. The owner gave him the job, saying that he would be working on a weekend shift
with seven other young men, all students from the local area. The shift manager would train him on the
car wash equipment.
On Danté's first day, the shift manager gave him only a few minutes of instruction on the equipment.
Dante watched what the other men were doing, but when he asked questions, they were not very
helpful.
Over the next few weekends, Danté concentrated on his work but because of certain events, he
increasingly began to stay by himself. A few co-workers invited him to join their little group for lunch
or breaks, but others consistently cracked ethnic and racial jokes, often within hearing of the shift
manager. One day Danté overheard the manager say that Black people were responsible for increased
violence in the community. This statement encouraged some co-workers, who had previously eaten
lunch with Danté, to tell a couple of jokes about Black people. When they glanced at him as they told
their jokes, he got up and walked away.
One busy Saturday afternoon, a whole section of the car wash equipment broke down because
someone had allowed the system to become overheated. Danté had worked on that section until his
break, when a co-worker took over. The system had broken down at some point after that.
The shift manager was furious and accused Danté of negligence. Danté replied that he believed the
system was fine when he left for his break. Although Danté insisted that the equipment failure was not
his fault, the shift manager fired him. Danté believed he was discriminated against because he is Black,
while his co-workers and managers are White.
Group discussion questions:

C) Did the shift manager have good reason for firing Danté? Why? (2.5 marks)

No, the shift supervisor wasn't justified in his action of firing Dante. First of all, he lacked the
training necessary for such important employment. Secondly, he was unable to establish Dante's
guilt and understand the imperative reasons to do so. Before dismissing anyone, the management
had to perform an inquiry into the accident in order to identify the mistaken party.
Issue 18/08/2011 Revision Date 25/06/2018 Form No. ECT/ACA/F03.04

Group Work # 2

D) What factors would a human rights tribunal take into consideration? (3.5 marks)

The following elements that strengthened the notion of discrimination will be taken into account by the
tribunal:
• At first, the owner was hesitant and resisted assigning Dante any task.
• Dante had insufficient teaching; he just received brief spoken lessons.
Because he wasn't integrated with them, his coworkers likewise displayed prejudice.
• By making racial jokes and suggesting that black people are the cause of violence, the boss encouraged
and contributed to the poor behavior of other employees.