In most instances, principles of modern law are based on statutes. Commercial property law is based on either common law or statute law. The implication is that there is interplay between common and statutory law in regards to several aspects.
The tenant-landlord laws guide the commercial, residential and rental property. Primarily, the laws are made up of statutes and common laws (Friedman, 2005). Several States base statutory law on Model Residential Landlord-Tenant Code or the Uniform Residential Landlord and Tenant Act (URLTA). In the United States, the Federal statutory law is a critical factor in responding to emergencies. In addition, such laws are helpful in guarding against discrimination. Based on this establishment, it is arguable that the principles of modern law have an association with statutes.
The legal relationship between tenants and property owner is premised on property and contract law. A tenant has an interest in the property in question for some time. The duration of tenancy, normally lasts for a specified time. Alternatively, the tenancy time may remain indefinite. In the latter arrangement, the pact is terminable upon the fulfilment of given conditions. When the tenancy agreement is based on a specified time, the property owner has no right to access the property unless permitted by the tenant. However, tenancy agreements may limit some rights. Tenancy agreements are viewed alongside leases. Historically, leases are not strictly contracts although they are subject to the provisions of contract law. Contract law is often a section of the common law (Garner, 2001). However, contract law is subject to various statues that are developed based on emerging needs. Since tenancy laws are based on contract law which reflects both the common law as well as statute law, it is arguable that principles of common law are statute based.
Tenant-landlord agreements reflect duties that are proscribed by common law, statutory law, or individual lease pacts. In practice, the details of a lease are normally subject to statutory law. The most basic attribute of the leases is the implied agreement that a tenant should be free from undue and disturbing conduct from any person (Salmond, 1907). Thus, while occupying the rented premises, a tenant reserves the rights to freedom of choice in regards to usage of the property. Not even the Landlord has a right to interfere. Any breach of contract of quiet enjoyment is punishable before a court of law. The rules as indicated are derived from statute law.
Housing codes are used to guarantee that residential houses are habitable. This applies both to the time when renting of premises is done as well as to the time of occupation. Depending on the State, violations of housing codes may trigger administrative action (Mahler, 2004). Alternatively, in a similar case a tenant could be allowed to withhold rent payments. The common law or various statutes prescribe the constituents of habitability.
It is notable that commercial tenants lack fundamental protection from the challenges that they are likely to encounter. This does not however imply that tenants are entirely with a source of protection from unscrupulous Landlords. Statute or statutory law extends rights to tenants in regards to terms and conditions of services.
When conditions deteriorate, a commercial tenant is entitled to refuse to honour the lease. Whenever, a building is damaged due to occurrences that are not attributable to the tenant, the owner is bound to take corrective measures to address the situation (Osley, 2008). The implication is that tenants have a right to refuse paying for premises which are unfit for occupancy.
Common law is critical in understanding the law in its entirety. In most countries such as the United States and the UK, basic law involving contracts, property, and torts do not exist in statutory provisions but only in the common law (Theodore & Geoffrey, 2008). However, there are some cases where statute law applies. In instances where statutory frameworks of law such as sale of goods, contracts, legislature-enacted statutes only offer terse statements that are general. Thus, the common law is useful as it gives clear definitions and limits of the law unlike the former.
Under common law provisions, the expectation is that legislatures and law jurisdictions operate under the pretext that statutes are interpreted based on pre-existing laws and customs (Lobban, 2004). For instance, statute laws reflect the codification of common laws. When the main law remains, the interpretation of statute laws is done based on the former. This perhaps explains why under modern law, statutes leave a number of unstated terms. Thus, statutes are often brief as they leave the task of explanation to the main laws. The implication of the establishment is that statute law is viewed as an appendage of common law.
However, in some instances, states engage in statutory codification of the common law. In this regard, a legislature would create a new requirement that never existed in the common law. Alternatively, a statute could overrule the provisions of the common law. Based on this establishment, statute law may not necessarily be based on common law.
The prime principle under contract law revolves around the notion that agreements be legal in nature. The central idea gravitates around the conviction that the law does not sanction illegal acts (Stephen, 2003). Succinctly, contracts are based on issues that can be enforced by courts. Additionally, if a stipulation in a contract contravenes the laws of the land, then such a contract would be deemed as being void. When a tenant agrees terms and conditions with a Landlord, a contract is entered. However, if one party misguides another by presenting false information such a contract could be invalid. In an attempt to escape liability, parties consider inserting exclusion sub-clauses into contracts.
Under the common law, it is clear that provisional clauses may diminish the value of implied terms of contracts. Implied terms cover the quality of goods, the description of goods, the condition, etc (Smith, 2006). The insertion of the clause into the sale contract implies that parties could not seek damages on the mentioned aspects. However, some aspects are clear in such contracts. The first aspect centres on misleading information or false disclosure (Jeffery, 1957). As the law indicates, a party to a contract is under an obligation to disclose any information that pertains to the functioning of a product, especially on issues that are likely to be faulty. If one party fails to observe this requirement by not pointing possible defects, such contracts could be deemed as null and void. As such the sub-clause claiming an absence of liability on various counts would fail to hold.
Two terms, implied and express are valuable in understanding contracts. Express terms are those terms that are mentioned in the negotiations and agreed upon by the contracting parties (Peter, 1988). Such terms are either oral or written. As an illustration, the terms reflected in the negotiations between tenants and Landlords capture the express part of the contract.
On the converse, implied terms are those that are attributable to statutes governing the sales or contracting acts. As an illustration, the Sale of Goods Act contains implied terms of a contract. Making specific reference to the Sale of Goods Act of 1979, the individual that is selling products should have a legal right to do so (Section 12). Based on section 13, when selling goods by description, the goods should posses the mentioned features. Moving to the next section, the quality of the goods sold must be of acceptable quality. Put differently, the goods should meet standards that are satisfactory even to an average person. Further, when a buyer indicates that they are buying goods for a particular purpose, then the products bought should serve the intended purpose. Failure to serve such a purpose implies that the goods sold are of questionable quality. In reference to this establishment, a contract has an implied term that goods sold should be of acceptable standards (Wilmot et al, 2009). Based on this establishment, common principles appear to be based on statutes.
Common law principles in regards to contract law indicate that only adults have a legal enter agreements. Hence, the first implied term is met. Secondly, leasing goods/property through description implies that the actual goods/property sold have the qualities outlined. In this regard, the premises rented should meet all details as given in tenancy agreements. In particular, the premises should have the mentioned measurements. For a contract to be valid, implied terms are to be honoured. The presumption is that goods sold or the leased property should serve the intended purpose. As such, they should remain quality products.
Apart from terms implied by statutes, other terms are implied by courts (McKendrick, 2005). Factual matters are implied terms. As an illustration, an agreement to pay 4 500 pounds is a fact that each party to a contract understands. Matters of law are also implied in contracts. This is based on general public policy. In this regard, courts lay down the manner in which individuals conduct their activities. Another implied term is based on customary terms. By way of illustration, it is not mandatory to include obvious terms that are common practice in the business. Specifically, in the case under review, rented premises should be in a reasonable condition. As such, it is unnecessary to have these specifications indicated in tenancy agreements. It should be noted however that an express term might negate the provisions of an implied term. As an illustration, exclusion clauses may be used to limit the implied terms of the contract.
The Sale of Goods Act of 1979 helps in addressing the most serious concerns that bother consumers. The Act provides three major statutory rights. The Act goes further to describe the entitlement of consumers in an event of breach of the statutory rights.
The Act entitles consumers to the right to receive quality goods and products (McKendrick, 2005). In this regard, the goods received should be fit for the intended purpose. This provision applies to goods sold by a businessperson. In other words, a person who privately dispossesses his goods is not bound by this provision. In the current case, Alan was a proprietor who deals in vehicles. Hence, the provision applies. Based on this establishment, a Landlord is under an obligation to offer premises in a good condition in order to serve the intended purpose. This is because tenants are expected to place an order for a premise with specific particulars. Then the parties often proceed to discuss the specific purpose of the premises sought (William, 2006). Upon clearly understanding the requirements a decision is made whether to close or cancel a deal. Concisely, any form of misinformation is unacceptable and would lead to breach of contract. Thus is because such an act contravenes the requirement of fitness for purpose.
Common law principle may not cover some aspects although it is based on statutes. However, the law recognizes the notion that by paying a smaller price, consumers are willing to take an added risk (McKendrick, 2005). A second-hand property poses such dangers as developing faults or worse still breaking down completely. Hence, by paying less for second hand products, one is not guaranteed to enjoy the warranty issued by manufacturers. In a way, the buyer agrees to meet additional costs due to faults or breakdowns. Nevertheless, when a product develops a fault soon after purchase, the buyer feels an element of injustice although s/he cannot prove that such was attributable to the actions of the seller (Arnold-Baker, 2008). When a fault appears early enough, the buyer should consider such aspects as the price paid, safety implications, future expectations, etc and take the appropriate action that may involve seeking a refund from the Landlord in question.
In case breach of contract occurs, the party that breaches the provisions owes the other party remedial action (Smith, 2006). To remedy the aggrieved party, the breaching party pays damages. When the breach is material in nature, the recipient of goods may reject them and treat the contract as repudiated. In cases of a consumer contracting, when either a seller breaches implied or express terms on such accounts as the quality of goods and goods are different from those intended, then the seller should be forced to meet the damages.
Under the provisions of contract law, an agreement is made either orally or by writing. The people involved must be adults. In addition, the individuals in a contractual agreement pursue enforceable pacts mainly of a business nature. In the case under review, the employer has entered a contract with the contractor, as has the contractor with the engineer.
Further, under the common law, creating an enforceable contract requires the fulfilment of certain conditions. As an illustration, the offer must come from one party (the offeror) requesting another party (the offeree) to do something. To complete the contract, the offeree has to accept the offer. In case of rejection of the offer then no contract is formed. However, the contract only takes effect after some payment (consideration) is made. Under common law, it is possible that the offeree tables a counter-offer (Rush & Ottley, 2006). This is possible if the offeree wants to accept the offer on different terms. An acceptance of the counteroffer is necessary if the contract is to take effect. Given the above establishment, it is evident that a contractor and employer enterers a contract based on the acceptance of the counter-offer the contractor offers the employer.
McKendrick (2005) observes that there are essential elements that underpin contracts under common law. The bottom-line is that parties can enter a contract over any aspect as long as it is legal. Normally, the contract contents initially sets out the parties entering the contract. Further, the contract gives details regarding the particulars of the agreement. Moreover, the contract gives details regarding the costs and the time of payment. It is worth noting that sometimes circumstances may affect the costs and time agreements of a contract. As such, provisional clauses such as majeure clauses are inserted into contracts to offer regulation. Breach of contract under common law arises when a party contravenes the set provisions (William, 2006). A contract is flouted in several ways. By way of illustration, failure to pay the agreed fee or to complete a task in the given time paves way for a breach of contract. In case of delay, the aggrieved party has a right to seek remedial action. In practice, damages present the most common form of remedy available to victims of a breach of contract.
It is important to note that the question under discussion requires critical insight. The considered aspect has no direct answers that could be highlighted. Consequently, I am left to search for relevant information and apply it to the question. Thus, the development of the paper is based on a synthesis of a number of sources. Thus, a major problem rests on connecting the information to the question.
This paper considers the issue of whether the principles of modern law are based on statutes. Since, there two variants of the law often interact, it is held to some extent, the principles of common law are statute based. The view is held since commercial property law is based on either common law or statute law. The insinuation is that there is a relationship between common and statutory law in reference to several aspects.
The tenant-landlord laws guide the commercial, residential and rental property. Principally, the law is a composition of statutes and common laws. Several jurisdictions base statutory law on Model Residential Landlord-Tenant Code or the Uniform Residential Landlord and Tenant Act (URLTA). For instance, in the United States, the Federal statutory law is a critical factor when handling emergencies. In addition, such laws are helpful in guarding against discrimination. Based on this realisation, it is far from certain that the principles of modern law have an association with statutes.
Common law normally emerges out of precedents. That is to say that common or case law has much input from judges. On the other hand, the statutory law is based on legislative enactments. Since the judiciary uses the legislative enactments as the basis of their judgements, it is concluded that the two influence each other. More significantly, the common law principles heavily borrow from the statutory law.