Do you agree with Lord Nicholls' and Lord Millett's dissenting Essay

Do you agree with Lord Nicholls' and Lord Millett's dissenting judgments in Shogun Finance Ltd v Hudson [2003] UKHL 62 - Essay Example Lords Hobhouse, Philips and Walker took the position that the initial contract was void altogether so that the innocent third party lost the protection provided for by Section 27 of the Hire Purchase Act 1964.1 The three Lords, relying on Section 29(4) of the Hire Purchase Act, 19642 held that since the initial contract provided for the identities of the parties to the sale and the person to whom the goods had been delivered was not a party to the contract, that contract was void. Lords Millert and Nichols, dissenting, took an entirely different approach and asserted that the plaintiff delivered the goods to the person they mistakenly took to be a party to the contract, but was nevertheless the party with whom they intended to pass title to.3 Therefore the initial contract was merely voidable. The overall tone of the dissenting decision reflects a willingness to overcome doctrines of contract law in such a way as to avoid leaving two essentially duped and innocent victims of a fraudster pitted against one another with the result that the most disadvantaged victim is left with no claim. Although the arguments submitted by the dissenting justices raise questions of fairness and equity, the majority decision illustrates that overcoming that unfairness is not supported by tenets of contract law. The rulings of the majority of the Lords appear to take a severe position against the consumer who trades in second-hand goods, it makes practical sense, since the risks associated with these kinds of purchases can be avoided by purchasing goods from authorised dealers. This approach is not only consistent with principles of contract law, it is also consistent with common sense. Any person dealing in used or second-hand goods accepts certain risks, one of which is the risk of gaining bad title or no title at all. The position taken by the two dissenting Lords are too focused on consequences for the

Monetary Economics Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Monetary Economics - Essay Example When the Fed lowers rates then we expect an increase in borrowing, when rates are reduced there is an expectation that inflation will rise, therefore inflation will increase when the rates are reduced. When the Fed lowers rates then we expect an increase in borrowing, an increase in borrowing means that there will be an increase in spending which will lead to an increase in output. An increase in output means that the economy will grow. When the Fed lowers interest rates this may result into an increase in money supply, n increase in money supply in the economy means that there will be a rise in expected inflation rate and therefore inflation rates are expected to increase. Calculation of future spot rate is complicated in that we assume that the 3rd year rate is equal to the five year rate, in the last calculation we consider two years which is the second and third year rate and also assume that the third year rate is equal to 2.04, the values provided are an estimate of what is expected by investors and this is because of uncertainties in future. The yield curve is a curve that depicts the yield or the cost of borrowing over time, the yield curve is an upward sloping curve and this means that if an investor invests his funds for a duration of t years then the yield will be a function of time, this means that the more the investor invests in terms of years then the higher is the yield. Prevailing interest rates which is the cost of borrowing will determine the position of the yield curve, in our case the chart shows that the yield curve has shifted downwards compared to the