S.O.S.!!! Need help on Contract Law assignment!

Hi,

I really need help with this assignment - I'm new to this subject and I have no idea how to write a law assignment as it differs to other subjects in terms of writing.

***************************************************************
Sunshine Ltd is a small independent television production company which specialises in making television programmes that it then sells to television broadcasting companies in Ireland.
In January 2006 it signed a contract with an actor called Pete for him to play a leading role in one of its productions to start filming in April 2007.
In the course of 2006 Pete became extremely famous and in great demand and Sunshine Ltd launched a large advertising campaign publicising his appearance in their forthcoming production. The campaign was expensive, costing €300,000, but it was successful in generating great interest. As a result Sunshine Ltd got a contract to sell their production to one of their usual Irish clients in a deal that would enhance their usual profit of €500,000 by a further €250,000. More importantly, however, it allowed them to sell their production to an American television company at a profit of €1 million.
Unfortunately in March 2007, Pete informed Sunshine Ltd that he had no intentions of making a film with them – as he had been offered a lucrative contract worth €15 million to make a film for a Hollywood company.
Sunshine Ltd have been told that if they replace Pete with a lesser known actor, who is available and willing to do the work, their profit from the Irish deal will be reduced to its usual level and they will lose their American deal completely.

Analyse the scenario from the perspective of contract law and advise Sunshine Ltd as to any action it may take.

************************************************************ *************

Many thanks!

Greetings!

You are right in assuming that analyzing law problems differs from writing other types of essays. There is a general formula that is used, which is abbreviated "IRAC": Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion (these terms may vary slightly in other countries or jurisdictions; I studied U.S. law). The way it works is this: first, you identify the issue or issues involved. For example, in this fact situation, the main issue is whether the fact that Pete became so famous and in-demand before the contract was to be performed was a change of circumstances which would render the contract unenforceable.
The rule is that, if the change in circumstances was unforeseeable and rendered performance of the contract excessively onerous, the party whom the change affects should not be required to bear the effects of the change. The application of the rule to the facts requires a discussion of whether the rule fits in these circumstances, thus rendering the contract unenforceable. In this case, a good argument could be made that the possibility of an actor becoming successful and famous in a period of more than one year is not unforeseeable; it is, in fact, the whole aim of his career. Therefore, the facts do not meet the requirements of the rule, and the conclusion must thus be that Sunshine Ltd. would be successful in a suit for breach of contract against Pete.

I hope this helps clear things up for you!

Thanks,

Sarah, EssayForum.com

This is a good start to understand the question better. Thank you so much, Sarah.

I do have a question of the suit though :

should sunshine ltd. get an injunction to get pete to perform anyway, and profit the usual 500,000 + 250,000 + 1 million

or

is sunshine ltd. only able to sue pete for punitive damages of 300,000 loss spent on the campaign on pete?
it's just the way i see it, sunshine would've gotten the 500,000 deal anyway regardless the change of actors

and ive been up to my eyes looking for an example of anticipatory breach of contract case, apart from Hochster v De La Tour (1853) as it is already in my lecturer's notes!

Greetings!

Sunshine Ltd. cannot get an injunction to force Pete to perform; a court cannot force someone into involuntary servitude. Sunshine's remedy is money damages. My analysis as to the amount of damages would be that Pete is liable for all of the losses stemming from his breach of contract. This would mean, for starters, that he would owe the company 500,000 + 250,000 + 1 million. However, the company also has a duty to mitigate damages if they can. Therefore, since they could still make 500,000 by using another actor, the 500,000 should be deducted from the amount Pete owes them. As to the 300,000-euro advertising campaign, it sounds as though the company incurred those expenses specifically because Pete was to be the star; therefore, it was foreseeable that if he backed out, they would lose that money. Thus, Pete should be liable for that amount as well.

If you're needing U.K. case law, you might have a look at Woodar Investment Development Company v. Wimpey Construction U.K. Ltd. [1980] All E.R. 571.

I hope this helps!

Thanks,

Sarah, EssayForum.com

thanks for your help sarah
i've submitted my conclusiona and i hope i did well!

thanks again!

You're welcome! :-)

Sarah, EssayForum.com