Search results

The digital medium has created new ways of contracting through web pages and smartphone apps. The websites and apps put numerous terms of contract. In some cases, the user is required to click on them, and other times, the user may or may not even notice the terms. Are the terms put by the sites and apps binding? The case explores the theme with the Uber Case, a judgement of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, on the application of the terms in the Uber app.

The central lesson to be learned from studying the case is to understand the challenges and constraints posed by contextual conditions in designing contracts in public–private partnerships (PPP) for financing and delivering health care in emerging economies such as India.

Perverse incentives, along with contextual conditions, led to extensive opportunistic behaviors among involved agencies, limiting the effectiveness of otherwise highly regarded innovative design of the program.

India’s “Rashtriya Swasthya Bima Yojana” or National Health Insurance Program, launched in 2007 provided free health insurance coverage to protect millions of low-income families from getting pushed into poverty due to catastrophic health-care expenditure. The program was implemented through a PPP using standardized contracts between multiple stakeholders from the public and private sector – insurance companies, hospitals, intermediaries, the provincial and federal government.

Teaching Notes are available for educators only.

CSS: 10 Public Sector Management.

Rachel Banning was assigned a new role in HR with the responsibility to update recruitment and orientation systems to meet the rapidly growing demand for manpower at McCune Contracting, an oilfield services provider in Alberta, Canada. McCune’s industry peers were competing to attract the same skilled employees, within a relatively small talent pool. The HR team was only a few short weeks away from the upcoming peak “turnaround season” when they would be expected to recruit and deploy 500 new temporary workers for their clients’ sites. Banning knew she had to take immediate actions to fix as many of the systems issues as possible and to eventually set the team up with a more permanent solution for systems integration.

The authors had access to McCune Contracting to complete field research for this case.

The case is designed for business students at both graduate and undergraduate levels. The case can be used in operations management courses to discuss the topic of process analysis and operations strategy or in management information system courses as a comprehensive case study for use at the end of the course. The case might particularly appeal to students who have worked in human resources management areas or the service industry.

Theoretical underpinnings include a process view of organizational performance, internal supplier and internal customer orientation, performance improvement, information systems integration and value chain analysis.

Business contracts are formed through negotiations, where the parties agree on some terms, disagree on others and keep yet others undecided. Over a period of time, they see themselves as having moved from being negotiating parties to contracting parties, settling on most of the terms. The law, however, states that a contract is formed when a person makes an offer and the other accepts it. The principle arose from the rudimentary trade practices in the past. The principles coming from the prior centuries and the modern business practices may not be in consonance. The Gibson v. Manchester City Council Case, a judgement of the House of Lords of the United Kingdom, reviewed attempts to modernize the law.

The Supreme Court judgement, Kailash Nath Associates v. Delhi Development Authority consolidates the law on award of liquidated damages and stipulations on penalties. Contractual damages are to cover losses and not to profit from or penalise the party in breach. Stipulated amounts in damages or penalties are appraised by the courts and only a reasonable compensation is given. Earnest money, and its forfeiture, stood distinct. It could be forfeited without appraisal. The case integrates the different categories and re-states the principles for award of damages.

Business contracts are done on General Conditions of Contracts (GCC). The GCCs have detailed terms to displace general principles of contract law and bring certainty in commercial dealings. Bunge SA v Nidera BV, is a judgment of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, on damages terms in GCCs. A term on damages may not be a comprehensive code, answering all questions on damages. In this case, the general principles will survive and interact and interface with the contract terms to settle the rights and obligations of the parties.

The case provides an insight on the provisions of the IND AS 115 (largely converging with IFRS 15), financial impact of alternative accounting practices and dynamics of a revenue recognition decision. MBA students can use the knowledge derived from the case at their workplace when they encounter accounting of “revenue from a contract with customers”.

Saifudin Rehman, one of the promoter of Suprajeet Corporation (SUC) had been engaged in electrical installation contract business. The firm had been doing well in the field of small contracts and was having steady growth. People in the firm were also quite acquainted with the kind of contracts they were doing. However, Saifudin always wanted to get into a big contract business. For getting into big installation contracts, the corporation needed more working capital and needed to satisfy the criteria of having a high amount of turnover in the preceding year. The case will be looked into from the perspective of accounting procedure to see the possibility of increasing the revenue by changing the method of accounting in relation to revenue recognition. The case provided the opportunity to evaluate the benefits and the costs involved in changing the accounting method in SUC.

Commerce Graduates and MBA I.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 1: Accounting and Finance.

The founding principle of contracts is the freedom of the parties. The parties are free to choose their terms and follow any modality of communication, oral or written. As they can freely make a contract, they can freely modify or unmake it. Written contracts have a clause, No Oral Modification Clause (NOM Clause), precluding oral modifications of the contract. Irrespective of it, business persons make oral agreements modifying the contract, and later, dispute its validity. If the parties are free to contract, why should the oral agreement not be binding? In a NOM Clause then, ineffective? The United Kingdom Supreme Court, in MWB Business Exchange Centres Ltd v Rock Advertising Ltd, explores this fundamental question on contract law.

After decades of continuity, Luse Holdings faced a new challenge in 2015. The company needed to pivot in a changing industry context—specifically, Luse had lost a bid to a non-union competitor for the first time—and CEO and fourth-generation member Steve Luse was considering three primary options: (1) continue as is, while also adding non-union services; (2) sell part of the business to reduce family risk; or (3) sell the entire business to fund other family interests. A fourth possible option was a maximization-of-growth alternative.

This decision involved more than business considerations alone. The family's legacy as an industry champion and community philanthropist also required considering all relevant stakeholders, including immediate and extended family, employees, and community. Complicating the situation was the lack of an immediately identifiable successor in the next generation of the Luse family, though several fifth-generation members had completed internships with the business including Steve's daughter Ashley, a recent MBA graduate. Students will step into Steve's shoes as he considers what recommendations to make to the advisory board six months from now. Students can also take the perspective of Ashley, a rising next-generation member: should she join the family business?

The Mercini Lady Case is a modern statement of the law on the rights of the buyer in a sale contract. The seller has to supply goods in conformity with description, of merchantable quality and fit for the stated use. These rights, the ‘implied conditions’, however, can be ousted by express terms in the contract. The Court of Appeal judgement of the UK keenly considered that the exclusion clause should be interpreted in its business sense. However, it sided with precedence established over hundred years that the exclusion clauses take away valuable rights of the buyer and must be strictly and technically constructed.