Sunday 31 March 2013

What is meant by inflation targeting? Are central banks still committed to such a policy?


Please purchase from Scribd Store to view full version.

Info:  This is my dissertation on which I received a first. This essay will explain what is meant by inflation targeting by delving deeper into the theory and practice of inflation targeting. This is followed by the case-study analysis of the Bank of England to demonstrate that in times of recession, the commitment to inflation targeting can be abandoned. The following case studies on Japan and USA will be used to investigate to what extent is this lack of commitment detrimental. Finally, a concluding remark, that central banks are committed to inflation targeting subject to the condition that the economy is not suffering a downturn or crisis, will be proposed.


Thursday 28 March 2013

3 Minute Cases: White & Carter Ltd v McGregor 1962


Facts
  • Thus case concerns an advertising contract between the plaintiffs who sold advertising space on litterbins and the defendant, a party looking to advertise. 
  • The day the contract was drawn up, the defendant cancelled the contract. 
  • The plaintiff’s chose to affirm the contract and went a head with the advertising for the three years and then looked to sue the defendant for the contractual price. 
  • It made sense for them to pick this option that should they have accepted the breach there would be no losses at the time so would only be able to claim nominal damages

Judgement 

  • They were allowed to claim the contractual price as the anticipatory breach was of a condition so it was a major breach even though contract was waste of time and money. 
  • Further it should be noted, that it was highlighted that there was no obligation to mitigate losses when it comes to anticipatory breach and you can’t force the innocent party to accept the repudiation. 

Points
  • Does this make commercial sense 

How can the innocent party respond to an anticipatory breach?


  • Sometimes you will hear critics of the law argue that the law surrounding anticipatory breach favors the innocent party and this is because the innocent party has a choice and the power to decide what happens once the anticipatory breach is made. They can either accept the reputation or affirm the contract.
  • They is that the innocent party has to stick to the decision they have made or else there is a potential they themselves will find themselves in breach.
  • If they chose to accept the breach then they can claim damages. 
  • However should they choose to affirm the contract then they cannot reply on anticipatory breach. This means that they have to make sure they fulfill all of their obligation or they run the risk of being in breach, The Simona 1989 (http://youtu.be/_ONrQWllmO0)

3 minute Cases: Fercometal SARL v Mediterranean Shipping Co 1989

What is anticipatory breach?


  • This occurs if one party notifies the other party of intention to breach the contract.
  • For example, Hochester v De La Tour 1853 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=He9w62ePgHY&list=UU-rlFDi-6V6kAc6ILyX8ggg&index=1). In this case the defendant employed the plaintiff to work starting in a month. Before he started work the defendant terminated the contract, the plaintiff argued there had been a breach. The courts agreed there had been a breach and the plaintiff could claim damages immediately. 
  • The remedy that an anticipatory breach fruits is dependent on on what type of term we are discussing; so the breach of a condition will yield the repudiation of the contract and the breach of a warranty or an innominate term will tend to yield damages.
  • With anticipatory breach the key feature is that the are communicated to the other party either expressly or impliedly.
  • By communicating the innocent party has a chance to seek performance elsewhere and could reduce the liability of the party in breach. It is beneficial for both parties. 
  • Express communication tend to be easier to deal with. Where it is implied it is more complex. The remedies tend to be more fact sensitive.

3 Minute Cases: Hochester v De La Tour 1853


  • In this case the defendant employed the plaintiff to work starting in a month. Before he started work the defendant terminated the contract, the plaintiff argued there had been a breach. The courts agreed there had been a breach and the plaintiff could claim damages immediately.

3 Minute Cases: Burgess v Rawnsley 1975




Facts
  • The plaintiff’s father was friends with the defendant (lady)
  • The house in concern wasn’t that big and divided into two flats, he lived downstairs and the upstairs flat was vacant 
  • The defendant was looking for a place to stay and so along with the plaintiff’s father bought the property.
  • They contributed half each and expressely said in the covenyence they will hold as joint tenants on trust for themselves
  • Issue was the plaintiffs father thought they were a couple whereas defendant saw it as friends. 
  • A year later when this became clear, they orally decided he would pay a greater price and buy her share of the property.
  • When it came to doing the formalities such as severing through written notice, s 36 LPA
  • One of the reasons she pulled out her offers is because she wanted to charge a higher price .
  • The father died at this point so the question became had the defendant severed and the property gone to the father’s daughter or did she now hold the property on trust for herself.
  • If she had severed as property was in the will for the daughter the plaintiff would hold the property on trust for her and if not would hold it on trust for herself.
Judgement

  • Yes it had been severed
  • The negotiations show an irrevocable will to sever and thus this is an example of reverence through mutual conduct
  • The stressed in this case that mutual conduct is heavily reliant on the facts of the case. 

Points

  • An example of a successful severance not in writing. 
  • Intention plays a great role