Business Studies > Summary > Summary C12 BUS LAW - CASE ANALYSIS 1 - OPTION WIRELESS, LTD. V. OPENPEAK, INC. ASHWORTH COLLEGE (All)

Also available in bundle ( Click Here )

Summary C12 BUS LAW - CASE ANALYSIS 1 - OPTION WIRELESS, LTD. V. OPENPEAK, INC. ASHWORTH COLLEGE

Document Content and Description Below

C12 BUS LAW - CASE ANALYSIS 1 - OPTION WIRELESS, LTD. V. OPENPEAK, INC. ASHWORTH COLLEGE.Summarize the facts of the case OpenPeak, Inc. were in the process of producing a computer tablet product for a ... client and during the production, placed a purchase order for embedded wireless data from Option Wireless, Ltd. The purchase order was to include details for the 12,300 units to be purchased at the price of USD $848,700. Both the Buyer and Seller settled on the how many shipments the order would arrive in initially and concluded the exact number of units and price that would be included in the final shipment, dependent on a deposit which would be paid in full for the remaining balance. The buyer’s invoice contained terms on this arrangement and, in addition, also contained a clause stating the buyer had a maximum of fourteen days to contest any area of the invoice as they see fit. The contract also stated that if this term was not complied with, the seller would not carry any responsibility for any damages incurred. Once the remaining balance was paid, the final shipment was sent however upon inspection of the units, the buyer concluded that the shipment contained multiple defects as they did not meet the specifications previously agreed upon. In light of this, the Buyer formally rejected the shipment and returned the defective modules approximately three months later. The seller requested that data be provided from the buyer to prove there was no such deficiency. Even though the buyer complied, the seller has not provided proof that there were no defects. The Buyer would like the seller to be charged a total of four criminal counts, three of which including counts as contractual breach and the fourth count to include unjust enrichment. The Seller moved to dismiss all contractual breach charges however motion to dismiss was denied in favor of the buyer. [Show More]

Last updated: 3 years ago

Preview 1 out of 5 pages

Buy Now

Instant download

We Accept: