Tommy and Johnson contract on Success Infinite Now Pte Ltd
A contract is a legally binding of two parties through written document or oral by word of mouth. Made of promises from both parties that on their satisfaction put their terms into an act (BONNER, 2018). Tommy and Johnson were in the same agreement of contract for Tommy to be performing for Johnsons Success Infinite Now Pte Ltd(SIN).
A breach of contract occurs when one party knowingly or unknowingly breaks the rules stipulated in the contract (Thorne J.D., n.d.). Tommy did not perform for Johnson after realizing he was paid less amount, Tommy on his part did not protect Tommy’s’ magician props. Terry the juggler also breached his contract terms by revealing to Tommy his pay after rehearsals.
Formation of a contract
Formation of a contract is a crucial stage undertaken that is put into a lot of consideration on breach of contract case (O’Grady, n.d.). The elements of a contract that must always be put into consideration are:
1. Offer- it’s the intent of ones’ willingness to work with the other party on a certain objective under a contractual basis and the offeree comes to terms with it (Davis, 2013). The offeror must show to the offeree an intent of legal binding so as to be termed as a contract,
2. Acceptance – this is now the show of acceptance for the offer by both the offeror and offeree (Davis, 2013). Acceptance comes after all the parties have agreed to the terms stated (Nolo, 2006).
Terms of a contract
A contract is put in place so as to protect the interest of both parties on contract (Joseph, n.d.). the terms of a contract specify the following: –
Duties- this are what the parties will be doing as per the contract. Tommy was to be performing at Johnsons SIN after 2 rehearsals in 3 weeks (Joseph, n.d.).
Dates of contract- this basically gives details on when the contract was signed by both parties and is normally on written contracts but for oral contracts it might be hard to get on the actual dates.
Contract payments- it specifies what is to be paid to each party but in our case, Tommy was to be paid by Johnson after rehearsals thou not specified the amounts but Johnson paid $1000 to Tommy.
Confidentiality- the contract terms are not to be shared as stated so as not to cause breach of other contractor’s contracts. It is also referred to as non-disclosure document. The terms of confidentiality contain trade secrets between the two parties (Quinn, 2017). From the case, there is no reference to breach of confidentiality since Johnson did not apply it when they were discussing contract terms with Tommy. If Johnson had set confidentiality terms then Tommy would not have known on the salary of Terry the juggler. Johnson would have been also able to sue Terry on terms of breach of contract on his part.
Tommy’s salary vs Terry’s salary
the salaries of the two was the matter of contention that led to Tommy leaving the rehearsal. salary is a confidential thing and so Johnson should have known that or else he should have paid both of them similar salaries according to the time of rehearsal so as not to cause conflict (Quinn, 2017). Tommy should have given Johnson time to explain on the variability of the two salaries, maybe Terry according to his terms that was what he was getting due to experience he had.
Contract compensation for Tommy
Compensation of damaged personal properties is a liability to the employer especially when the employees are involved and a place of work (Gilhooley, 2008). Although there is no legal binding to those liabilities, but when put on contractual basis then the employer is responsible. When negligence is the cause of damage then the employer is fully responsible for the damages (Gilhooley, 2008), under the common law. An employee or the affected party can then press charges on the issue. The employer will be liable for the damages under the vicarious liability principle that applies to the employer even if the employee was not present at the place of work on the time of damage (Israelstam, 2011), as long as the damage is done during the working hours.
When Tommy left the rehearsal and came back later he found his magician props had been damaged by students’ volunteers who moved the props to the stage. This is a case of whether Tommy should be compensated by Johnson or not. From the above brief research, we derive so many deliverables to make Tommy’s case. The magician props were at his place of work and the people who damaged the props were volunteers working in Johnsons SIN, Johnson will be liable for all the damages on Tommy’s magician props. This is under the vicarious liability principle (Israelstam, 2011).
Case scenario of SIN company not accepting responsibility to pay the damages
The case where the SIN company will not accept the liabilities in the case of them stating that personal property is to be taken care by individuals at all costs will lead to a lot of issues with law. If their case is based on contract terms then in a court of law they will have an upper hand and will win the case easily but when the case is not on the contract then Tommy will have an upper hand due to SIN negligence to personal property (“Boating Business | Who’s responsible for an employees’ personal property?”, 2008).
When there were no written contracts on property care then there will be many laws to protect Tommy like the vicarious liability law (Israelstam, 2011), and the law of property negligence by the employer (McEowen, 2007). The company will pay Tommy for all of his damaged property as stated in this case and will even pay for the damages for them refusing to compensate him.
contracts are very important for any pact two parties are coming together either as partners or one as employee of the other. All the terms for the activities should be put in order include confidentiality clause. The terms of the contract should be able to protect both the employer and the employee so as to control a scenario of liabilities on breach of contracts. The case of Tommy is a good example of a breach of contract where Tommy left his job after finding out that Terry is earning more than his twice by value. Tommy had trusted that Johnson will give him his equity due to their trust as friendship and he felt betrayed by him. Tommy’s magician props were also destroyed on the process creating another legal case apart from the breach of contract. The case is a bilateral in that both cases seems to be on the upper hand due to their stands and according to the laws if there was no contract stated for employee property then SIN is liable for the damages on the other hand if their was a contract the case is finished just like that. The case did not give a conclusive report on the details of the contract rather than just the mutual understanding of the two friends to work together.
Tommy and Johnson contract on Success Infinite Now Pte Ltd