What was the reason for the decision in the case of Hoyt's Pty Ltd v Spencer (1919) 27 CLR 133?
A) The oral statement was promissory and therefore enforceable as a collateral contract.
B) The oral statement was representational rather than promissory.
C) The oral statement was intended to form part of the agreement between the parties.
D) The oral statement was inconsistent with the terms of the written document.
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q1: When is a particular statement more likely
Q2: What is the court's rationale for distinguishing
Q3: Which of the following statements is the
Q4: Which of the following statements is the
Q5: The actual intention of the parties determines
Q7: If one of the parties had a
Q8: In the case of a written contract,the
Q9: Why was the statement found not to
Q10: What was the reason for the decision
Q11: Which of the exceptions to the parol
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents