IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHIIN THE MATTER OF CATHERINE SUSAN BONES......................…...............................................CLAIMANT VERSUS RETRO APPARELS PVT. LTD. .................................................................RESPONDENT ON SUBMISSION TO THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI MEMORIAL FILED ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT MOST RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED RACHIT GOEL COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT COURT ROOM EXERCISE ...................................................................................................................................8 ARGUEMENTS ADVANCED..........................................................................4 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION…………………...............................................................................................................................................................................3 CASES REFERRED....................................................11 OF OF OF WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE CLAIMANT ..........................................7 SUMMARY ARGUEMENTS.... 3 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS.................................................................................................................................................................................................2 COURT ROOM EXERCISE................……………………………………… 5 SUMMARY FACTS.......................................................................................................................................................3 OF STATUTES REFERRED........6 STATEMENT ISSUES...............................................................3 WEBSITE.... ADR 29TH AUGUST 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS INDEX AUTHORITIES.....................................................9 PRAYER........................................................................................................................... www.3 COURT ROOM EXERCISE.1969 CASES REFERRED 1.1996 2. Indian Arbitration And Conciliation Act.com 3. www.com 2.com WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE CLAIMANT . ADR INDEX OF AUTHORITIES STATUTES REFERRED 1.indlaw.manupatra.lawteacher. www. Family Law Reform Act . Fawcett v Smethurst 1914 WEBSITES 1. Nash v Inman 1908 2 kb 2. Honourable Ltd. -Company Ed.Versus Vol.Number Pvt. . ADR LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS Co. . .United Kingdom v.Edition Hon’ble . – Volume WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE CLAIMANT .Under Section UK. .Limited No.Private u/s .4 COURT ROOM EXERCISE. . (2) An arbitral award may be set aside by the Court only if(a) the party making the application furnishes proof thatWRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE CLAIMANT . 1996 READ WITH CLAUSE 23 OF THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE APPELLANT AND RESPONDENT Section 34 reads as under: Application for setting aside arbitral award. (1) Recourse to a Court against an arbitral award may be made only by an application for setting aside such award in accordance with sub. ADR STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION THE APPELLANT HUMBLY APPROACHES THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI UNDER SECTION 34 OF INDIAN ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT.5 COURT ROOM EXERCISE.section (2) and subsection (3). a famous child actor. India c. incorporated under the laws of UK engaged in the business of sale of designer clothing for use by child actors and celebrities. b. aged 16. the exclusive jurisdiction shall be vested with courts in New Delhi. or (iii) …….6 COURT ROOM EXERCISE. The governing law of the Contract shall be the substantive law of England SUMMARY OF FACTS Retro Apparels is a Co. or (ii) the arbitration agreement is not valid under the law to which the parties have subjected it or. The seat of arbitration shall be New Delhi.a sole arbitrator appointed by the agreement of parties. For all matters arising therefrom. WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE CLAIMANT .X. for the sale of 6 evening gowns to be worn by Miss Catherine Susan Bones to the Cannes film festival 2013. The said Co. The number of arbitrators shall be one to be appointed by the agreement of parties. India d. Any dispute arising out of or in connection with this contract shall be referred to and finally resolved by arbitration in India. failing any indication thereon. 2013 a dispute regarding the payment of purchase arose between the parties and a resort was made to binding arbitration before Mr. under the law for the time being in force. On January 10. Miss Catherine Susan Bones is a citizen of India. entered into a contract with Miss Catherine Susan Bones. Clause 23 reads as under a. ADR (i) a party was under some incapacity. 7. Aggrieved by the Arbitral award given by the sole arbitrator Mr. ADR Mr. WHETHER THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE PARTIES IS VALID? WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE CLAIMANT .X the Appellant has filed this application before this Honourable Court for setting aside the Arbitral Award ISSUES RAISED 1. 5 lakhs as damages and cost. 2013 delivered a binding Award in favour of Retro Apparels and ordered Miss Catherine Susan Bones to pay up Rs.8 lakhs as contract price plus Rs. X on July 10.7 COURT ROOM EXERCISE. 8 COURT ROOM EXERCISE. No. the contract between the parties is not a valid one as one of the party is a minor b. WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE CLAIMANT . WHETHER THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE PARTIES IS VALID? a. Also the Minor cannot be sued. ADR SUMMERY OF ARGUMENTS 1. ADR WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE CLAIMANT .9 COURT ROOM EXERCISE. the son of an architect entered into a contract with tailor for the supply of clothes including 11 ‘fancy waistcoats’. 2 Nash v Inman 1908 2 kb WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE CLAIMANT . Therefore clothes supplied by the tailor could not be classified as necessaries. 1 Capacity to buy and sell. he must pay a reasonable price for them. but the contract was not enforceable because the minor was already adequately supplied with clothes. According to Sec. to the value of $122. In the case of Nash v Inman 2 A Cambridge undergraduate. 1 Sec 3(3) explain the word necessaries. ADR ARGUEMENTS ADVANCED 1. (3)In subsection (2) above “necessaries” means goods suitable to the condition in life of the minor or other person concerned and to his actual requirements at the time of the sale and delivery. WHETHER THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE PARTIES IS VALID? It is humbly submitted before this Hon’ble Court that the contract between the parties is not a valid one as one party to the Contract is minor. In the present case the Appellant was at the age 16 at the time of entering the contract hence minor. (1)Capacity to buy and sell is regulated by the general law concerning capacity to contract and to transfer and acquire property. The cloth could be appropriate to the station in life of the undergraduate. It is humbly submitted before this honourable Court that a minor can enter too a Contract if the Contract is for its necessaries as under Sec 3 of the sales of Goods Act 1979. (2)Where necessaries are sold and delivered to a minor or to a person who by reason of mental incapacity or drunkenness is incompetent to contract. It humbly submitted before this Honourable Court that the minor cannot be sued nor is personally liable for the breach of Contract.1 of the Family Law Reform Act 1969 minor is simply a person under the age of 18.10 COURT ROOM EXERCISE. But a term in the contract states that the minor was to be held absolutely liable for any damage to the car regardless of how it was caused. ADR In the case of Fawcett v Smethurst3 Minor hired a car to transport his luggage. WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE CLAIMANT . This is prima facie a ‘necessary’.11 COURT ROOM EXERCISE. The court held that the minor is not personally liable and the contract is too onerous and therefore unenforceable against the minor. That the Contract Between the parties is void 2. reasons given and authorities cited. That the arbitral award may set aside Place: Delhi All of which respectfully submitted S/r:______________________ WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE CLAIMANT . the counsel for the Appellant humbly pray before this Hon’ble Court 1. arguments advanced.12 COURT ROOM EXERCISE. issue raised. ADR 3 1914 PRAYER Wherefore in the light of the facts.