Assignment (Case Analysis)
Assignment (Case Analysis)
I’D: 2016-1-66-062
Case No. 01
1
Name of the Case:
A passenger who purchased a ticket of the defendant company and it was written in the French
language. Where towards at the top of the ticket were the words to the effect that this ticket in
order to be available and it must be signed by the passenger to whom it is delivered. Moreover, at
the foot of the ticket there was a clause in red letters that the ticket was issued subject to the
condition printed on the back. One of those conditions was that the company incurred no liability
for any damage which the luggage might sustain. The vessel was wrecked by the fault of the
company’s servants, and the plaintiff’s luggage was lost. Then the plaintiff sued the defendant
company for damages. But the ticket was not signed by him. He stated that he did not understand
the French language and the conditions of the ticket had not been explained to him.
2
Name of the Case:
In this case, a film producer entered into an agreement with a minor girl to act in a film. Later,
the same agreement was entered into by the father of the minor or her behalf with the producer.
On a breach of that agreement, the minor girl sued the producer through her father as her next
friend.
In this case, it was held by Justice Desai that a minor cannot enter into an agreement but can
enter into an agreement if it is the benefit of that minor only then, but it must be construed with
the legal guardian for the legal necessity and for the beneficial purpose of him/her and the
promise must be moved from the minor to the other as for the reason of consideration matter.
Further it was also held that the agreement with the father was void and the minor is entitled to
sue through his or her legal guardian.
3
Otherwise, if it is the fact that there was no benefit of the minor then according to the general
principle of minor’s competency, the guardian was not competent to contract on behalf of that
minor. Therefore, the agreement of the father was void.