Take Home Assignment

(Case Study)

Submitted By
A.K.M Mahim Hossain; ID- 18204009
Meehda Luban Akhtar; ID- 18204006
Lamia Tasnim Arpita; ID- 19104149
Mohammad Abidur Rahman; ID- 19104180
Promity Islam; ID- 19104151
Afroja Fariha Sinthia; ID- 19304103

Section: 05

Course Title: Business Law

Course Code: BUS202

Submitted To
Md. Atekul Islam Nur Shuvo, Lecturer, School Of Law, BRAC University

Date of Submission: 20th September, 2020

Case Study: 01

ANS: If the individual from whom repayment is looked for. He is lawfully bound to pay for the

obligation in any case. And furthermore, if BRAC Bank Ltd has any true-blue enthusiasm to

ensure. For the two cases, the appropriate response is Yes. As indicated by Section 69 of the

Contract Act "An individual who is keen on the instalment of cash pays its qualified for be

repaid by other." Thus, if an occupant so as to secure his advantage takes care of the Government

income of his landlord, he can recoup the equivalent from the proprietor. For instance, where Mr.

X holds land in Bangladesh, on a rent conceded by Mr. Y, the Zamindar. The income payable by

A to the administration being in arrear, his territory is promoted available to be purchased by the

legislature. Under the income law, the result of such deal will be the dissolution of his own rent,

pays to the Government the whole due from Mr. Y. Mr. Y will undoubtedly make great to Mr. X

the sum so paid. 

In the stem, for this situation, the bank had bora fide enthusiasm to ensure and the landlord was

will undoubtedly pay for the obligation. In the stem, above all else, BRAC Bank Ltd. keeps up a

Luxurious branch office under an agreement of Tenancy with the landlord of the premises. The

period is for a long time therefore BRAC Bank Ltd. paid Taka 50, 00,000 as advance to the

landlord. Also, the Landlord instalment of arrear income of Taka 5,05,000 was unpaid

subsequently Government would have dropped the landlord's rent and taken the property which

would have brought about a misfortune at cutting edge cash, loss of customers, and loss of cash

spent on progress. Thus, it tends to be said that BRAC Bank Ltd. had genuine enthusiasm to

secure. 
Case Study: 02

ANS: The summary of the case is, Mr. A, a descendant from a Nawab family, has an

antique Longcase clock with ornamental engraved designs on it, wants to sell it as he is in

need of money. Following that he decided to put it in auction and give a condition to the

auction house that they cannot sell the clock under 250,000 taka. However, an interested buyer

after observing other buyers , he bought the clock from the auction house for 150,000 taka , even

though the buyer was aware about the “reserved price” which was 250,000 tk. Now Mr. A is not

satisfied with the auction house and want his item back as they did not sell the product the as

the required price. But the auction house refused to accept his offer. Now Mr. A needs advice.

According to Law of Agency, an auctioneer is an agent of his principle and authorized to sell

the goods of his principle by auction. He has a particular lien on the goods for his remuneration.

He also has double capacity. Till the sale is accomplished, he is an agent for the seller. After the

sell he becomes the agent of the buyer. Along with that, he has implied authority. The gives him

the authority to sell the good below the “reserved price”. For this the principle of the good can

not sue or take any legal actions. He does not have any legal remedies against the auction house

However, he has a remedy against the buyer. If the buyer aware of the reserved price before

buying the product, even though he bought the good under reserved price, the owner/principle of

the good can ask the buyer for the rest of the money or give back him/her the product back.

Now in the following case, Mr. A has no remedies against the auction house. He cannot sue or

take legal action against the auction house as they sold the good under reserved price. The law
gives the auction house the implied authority that they can sell the good below the reserved

price. However, Mr. A can go to the buyer who bought the good at 150,000tk and ask him for the

rest of the 100,000 taka or ask him to give back his product in return of the money as the buyer

knew the reserved price before he bought the Longcase Clock. Therefore, Mr. A is only left with

this remedy to get the rest of the money or to get back the product as he has no way to sue the

auction house given the implied authority by the law to auction house.