Contract law worksheet with answers

Which equitable remedy corrects a written contract so it records what the parties actually agreed?

1. ARescission
2. BRectification
3. CSpecific performance
4. DQuantum meruit

A term that the parties did not state, but which a court reads into the contract, is:

1. AAn implied term
2. BA condition precedent
3. CA collateral warranty
4. DAn express term

Anticipatory breach occurs when:

1. AA party performs earlier than the agreed date
2. BAn expert predicts, before performance is due, that a party will probably breach
3. CA party shows, before performance is due, that it will not perform
4. DA party breaches a term that has not yet been agreed

A misrepresentation is:

1. AA false statement of fact that induces someone to enter a contract
2. BAn opinion that turns out to be wrong
3. CSilence about any fact at all
4. DA promise about future behaviour that is not kept, even if honestly made

A fishing company receives fewer licences than it needs and chooses to assign them to its other ships, not the chartered one. In Maritime National Fish v Ocean Trawlers the charter was:

1. AVoid, because licences were a condition precedent
2. BSuspended until more licences were issued
3. CFrustrated by the government licensing decision
4. DNot frustrated, because the problem was self-induced

A supplier receives a draft agreement, never signs or returns it, but both sides trade on its terms for years. A court is likely to find:

1. ANo contract, because nothing was signed
2. BA contract only for the first delivery
3. CA void agreement for lack of certainty
4. DA contract accepted by conduct

A pays B money to bet on shares using insider information, which is illegal. The bet never happens and A wants the money back. In Patel v Mirza, the Supreme Court held:

1. AThe money passed to the state as illegal proceeds
2. BA could recover only half the money
3. CA could not recover, because no claim can be founded on an illegal agreement
4. DA could recover the money, applying a policy-based approach to illegality

A distribution agreement says it is not a formal or legal agreement and is "binding in honour only". In Rose and Frank v Crompton, the court held:

1. AThe agreement was void as illegal
2. BThe agreement itself was not legally binding
3. CThe agreement was a deed and binding
4. DThe agreement was binding despite those words