+61480015851
CA269: Moot Law - Ellie GreenLove v VITAMIZZ Ltd - Law Assignment Help
Download Solution
Order New Solution
Internal Code: 1ABJHJ
Law Assignment Help
Case : IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) Ellie GreenLove v VITAMIZZ Ltd A poster next to the VITAMIZZ Ltd stand at the Eat, Sleep, Retreat Festival read: ‘Free VITAMIZZ blender perfect for blending soups and smoothies to any shopper purchasing a minimum of £200 worth of wellness goods at this stand this weekend’. Ellie GreenLove, a wellness blogger, visited the stand and saw the poster display (the display included a space for the VITAMIZZ blenders to be kept, but this was empty). Ellie placed £250 worth of wellness goods and yoga clothing in a recycled shopping basket and went to the payment area. The check-out operator recorded all the purchases on the iPad and asked Ellie for £250. When Ellie asked for the free VITAMIZZ she was told by the operator the stand had run out of them, but that she could have a free box of organic soup and smoothie powders that she could add water to instead. Ellie, a plant based cooking expert, refused to accept the ‘powder pack’ and refused to pay for the £250 worth of goods. She started to replace those goods on to the wooden shelves and into the wicker baskets. The manager of the stand was called and he refused to allow the goods to be replaced, claiming Ellie had already purchased the goods and was liable to pay for them. Ellie who suffers from anxiety, started to sweat and shake and refused to pay, leaving the stand without the goods and taking deep breaths. VITAMIZZ brought a claim against Ellie asserting that she was in breach of a contract of sale and claimed for the lost profit on the £250 worth of goods. Ellie counterclaimed for the value of the VITAMIZZ and a small sum for the mental distress she had suffered. At first instance her Honour Judge Nesbitt allowed VITAMIZZ’s claim, holding that Ellie had entered a legally binding contract when the goods were recorded on the iPad at the check-out point. She dismissed Ellie’s counterclaim for the value of the VITAMIZZ on the grounds that the poster next to the stand was merely an advertising puff and that, in any case, there was no intention on the part of VITAMIZZ to create legal relations in respect of the VITAMIZZ blender. Judge Nesbitt also dismissed the claim for mental distress. Ellie now appeals to the Court of Appeal on the following grounds:- There was no contract for the £250 worth of goods. If the court were to find a contract, Ellie makes a small claim of £50 for the mental distress she suffered as a result of the situation.
- If the court were to hold that there was a contract for £250 worth of goods, there was an offer of a VITAMIZZ blender and that that offer had been accepted. Ellie therefore claims for the value of the VITAMIZZ.
- Independently plan, research, evaluate and apply existing and or new legal knowledge to a topical issue or problem based on the foundations of legal knowledge.
- Locate and analyse information from multiple sources to construct written legal argument while ensuring sources are appropriately constructed and referenced.
- Develop a capacity to evaluate argument based on facts and law and apply along with the ability to recognise alternative conclusions for particular situations using a range of sources.
- Use the format of a moot to engage in oral academic debate in a professional manner by presenting specialist material according to court etiquette orally and in the form of a written skeleton argument.
- Be able to present oral information effectively by adopting a relevant strategy and using on point authority to summarise legal propositions.
- Be able to work effectively as part of a team to compile written research and present orally as part of a moot whilst reflecting critically on own learning processes.
- A written response and evaluation of the relevant legal points raised by the moot problem and the arguments made in favour of either the appellant or respondent. Each individual, as part of their team pairing must submit no more than 1,000 words each. Both pieces of work must be combined as part of one document and submitted as a joint piece of teamwork but they will be marked individually. See assessment guidance on page 3. This counts for 30% of the module mark.
- An oral moot style assessment, which takes place, in your moot teams, in term two (before the Easter Break) on the week commencing 18th March 2019 and counts for 70% of the module mark. This piece of work will be marked individually. You are required to jointly submit your skeleton argument by Friday 15th March 2019 at 10.00am. Please note: on the day of the moots please ensure you bring your bundle of authorities (including a copy of the skeleton argument previously submitted), diary of meetings and peer assessment form – these will be handed to the judge at the beginning of the moot.
This CA269: Law Assignment has been solved by our Law experts at My Uni Papers. Our Assignment Writing Experts are efficient to provide a fresh solution to this question. We are serving more than 10000+ Students in Australia, UK & US by helping them to score HD in their academics. Our Experts are well trained to follow all marking rubrics & referencing style.