|← Business Strategy: Starbucks||Contemporary Issues in Business →|
This paper answers questions based on the law of contract provisions. There are cases which are subject to analysis. The first case involves Colossus Studio and Cameron. Colossus had signed a contract with Cameron where the latter, an actress was to feature in a movie that was to be based on an award-winning literary novel. The movie to be directed by a director who had won an Oscar for another film based on such a novel. This was to be done between the period of May and September 2002. The payment to Cameron was agreed at $ 5 million. However on February 2002, Colossus informed Cameron that they had decided to cancel the contract and they were offering to the actress ‘the leading female role’ in a new R-rated action movie starring Sylvester Stallone and Vin Diesel to be made during May and September 2002. Colossus offered her to star in this movie on the same conditions as earlier. Cameron was unhappy with the change of plans and sued for breach of the contract.
Cameron’s case could be successful. This is because, Colossus has breached the contract. The agreement with Cameron was that she features in the earlier movie, which had different features from what is being proposed now. The initial movie was based on an award –winning novel and the director had a great experience having won an Oscar. Therefore, the change of a movie and role would disadvantage Cameron and thereby she would be unable to perform well. A bad performance could result to missing such films in the future. Colossus would have then to compensate to damages equaling to $ 5 million which is the amount that was entitled to Cameron if the changes would not have been made.
In the second case, Martinez is under the contract with Colossus to appear in the 24 season for the periods of 2004-2005 and 2005-2006 seasons. However, in 2004, Martinez announced that she will not feature in the seasons. Colossus filed a suit for breach and is seeking for the specific performance. Martinez has no doubt breached the contract. However, the orders sought cannot be granted since it is unreasonable to order someone to appear in a movie. The best remedy would be damages for the loss caused by the Martinez’s withdrawal.
In the third case, Mogul hired Bozo to construct a guesthouse. Payments were to be made at certain stages. The construction was to follow certain plans from Mogul. One of the requirements in the construction was the installation of a specified model of dishwasher manufactured by Maytag. Bozo instead used a similar one manufactured by General Electric. All the interior walls were to be painted with specified shades manufactured by Sherin-Williams paint C0. Bozo used similar paint manufactured by Vista Paint Co. After completion of the construction, an amount of $ 40,000 was to be paid to Bozo. Mogul refused to pay claiming that the terms of the contract were disobeyed. Mogul is obligated to make a payment to Bozo but the one which reflects the amount of work done. Where the alternative similar installations and paints were made of inferior quality, fewer amounts should be paid. If they are of superior quality, the exact amount as agreed should be paid without taking account of the improved quality.
In this last case, Mogul hired artist to do his picture impression. The contract had a clause that said, “the artist hereby agrees that Mogul’s personal satisfaction with the portrait painted by the artist is guaranteed”. When the portrait was completed, Mogul disliked it and thereby refused to pay the artist. However, other artists who saw the portrait expressed their satisfaction of the quality of the work done. Mogul’s wife also liked the portrait as it was of excellent quality. The artist has sued Mogul for the fee. Yang, the artist has done his job. He ought to get his fee for the services notwithstanding the attitude of Mogul towards the quality of the job. Since he hired him, he must therefore pay him. Mogul should be ordered to pay the agreed amount to Yang.