₦airaland Forum

Ameduedwin:
The answer is, that case is not a binding contract because it is not a written agreement between the two parts involved, in conclusion,any contact that's not a written conrrct or agreement between two parts is not a binding agreement.

sylve11:
Although Burna Boy may not be directly involved in the activities associated with Diddy, I contend that the narrative surrounding the Lamborghini serves as a diversion intended to redirect public attention away from the aforementioned proceedings related to Diddy.

[b]Wetin i know sef?[/b]

Melagros:
COMRADES are speechless, this is nothing but a misplaced priority

Melagros:
COMRADES are speechless, this is nothing but a misplaced priority

SoftSport:
Honestly, I think it’s a genius move by the Faculty – using real-world, high-profile scenarios like this makes the law feel way more relatable and gives students a fun way to apply legal principles.

Emmy000seun:
It worth studying...😂😂😂..d update bad gan ni...maybe burna was expecting something great inside, but when baba enter come see say na face be everything, inside don spoil, then he changed the agreement as the homosapien has betray his trust 😂😂

VinnyBaba:
Nice one.

Dats how Education should be.

Set Questions on contemporary issues of the Society.

@least with this one, the Olodos Runs Girls in the department will pass the exam easily.

Antichristian2:


Was there a valid agreement between them? Wey the proof?

Na so Natasha dey Globetrot around the world upon no proof!

Melagros:
COMRADES are speechless, this is nothing but a misplaced priority

samuelson06:
No answer is wrong in this sort of question. They only want to test your ability to argue intellectually, especially as a lawyer.

VinnyBaba:
Nice one.

Dats how Education should be.

Set Questions on contemporary issues of the Society.

@least with this one, the Olodos Runs Girls in the department will pass the exam easily.

Orlu13:
Useless country with useless education system with useless professors setting useless questions

DeGLORIOUS:
What's your definition of misplaced priority?

yinkeys:
The school didn’t have law a decade ago
I guess they’re teaching rubbish now

Zonefree:
If I'm the lecturer, you'll score 0% if you advise Sophie to continue with the lawsuit.

yinkeys:
The school didn’t have law a decade ago
I guess they’re teaching rubbish now

ppogba:
Not entirely true.
First, you cannot argue immorality in court. An ashewo in an hotel cannot go to seek redress in court at least by the Nigerian law as at this morning.

Second, there must be a contractual terms duly acknowledged by both parties before you can seek redress. When did mere words of the mouth become easily enforceable?

Sonnobax15:

The lecturer just stylishly gave out a very easy and simple question for the olosho of the department so that they can easily pass the exam

Ameduedwin:
The answer is, that case is not a binding contract because it is not a written agreement between the two parts involved, in conclusion,any contact that's not a written conrrct or agreement between two parts is not a binding agreement.

Mitsurugi:
Any law student or lawyer here will remember the in pari delicto rule. Where a contract or agreement in this case sex for Lamborghini is illegal or against public policy (Oloshoism). Where both parties are involved in the above illegal transaction, the court will likely not intervene to enforce the agreement or order one party to pay the other. It's a valid exam question. In real life lawyers face worse scenarios.

A man once sued his wife in an Agboju Customary Court because she refused to serve him three wraps of fufu with 4 pieces of meat per meal just because he allegedly opened the buka business for her.

Emuf:
You are right on point. I am currently running a course on contract law - "Contract Law: From Trust to Promise to Contract". I smiled when I saw your response. The situation is Immoral, and illegal court won't recognize Sophie in this scenario.

Zouzer:
You are truly a layman