Elements Required for the Formation of a Valid Contract

Elements Required for the Formation of a Valid Contract Introduction: When we think of any kind of business there comes the necessity of understanding and applying the rules, principles, norms, and usages of contract. Now a day there is hardly any business dealing that does not comes within the purview of contact. So its very important to have a clear and definite idea on the subject of contract law. However, in this paper Iv tried to give a glimpse on this subject along with its application in practical day to day to business practices in various areas. This piece of work will demonstrate the very basic and primary areas of contract, like offer and acceptance, consideration etc, with a particular emphasis on the operation and operation of business contact. In addition, the paper contains importance of understanding the principle of liability in negligence in business practices and made an effort to apply such principles and practices in different business situations. Requirement 1: Importance of the essential elements required for the formation of a valid contract: A contract is the agreement between parties regarding any kind of dealings that is enforceable in law. So an agreement between parties enforceable by law is a contract and never the others which are not enforceable by law. Suppose, an agreement to purchase 1-kg heroine is not enforceable by law and as such it cannot be a contract, but an agreement for the purchase of computer is enforceable by law and as such is a contract. In this regard, we can reach to a conclusion that all contracts are agreements, but not the vice versa. A contract between the parties can be created verbally; in writing (including by electronic means and website); by act, behave, conduct or inference or By means of all or any of the above mentioned ways. Essentials Elements of a Valid Contract: To be a contract, an agreement must fulfill the following conditions: Proposal(offer) and acceptance; the parties must be competent; the consent of parties must be free; there must have lawful consideration; the object must be lawful; and the agreement must not expressly declared void by law. Beside the above mentioned elements the contract must be certain; possible of performance and written and registered if so required by law.However there can be special principles, terms and conditions applicable to the contract as agreed by the parties that concern specific subject matters, such as employment contract, the sale of moveable property, sale of immoveable property etc. The Offer: Offer is the starting point from where an agreement gets life formally which ultimately may take the shape of a legally binding contract. Offer means the formal expression of intention or willingness of one party to another to do or to refrain from doing an act in order to obtaining the assent of the other party to such act or omission. When one party signifies his willingness to other party in order to take consent of that party regarding any dealing, the party expressing such willingness is said to make an offer and he is called the offeror and the person to whom it is made is called the offeree . So it is clear that, the offer must be communicated to the other party; it can be revoked at any time prior to acceptance. In this point we have to keep in mind that some kinds of transactions involve a preliminary negotiation in which one party invite the other to make an offer. Such an stage is called invitation to treat. Such primary negotiations are an way to reach a stage to make an offer. It is now well settled that negotiations to enter into a contract can amount to an invitation to treat but not an offer. Acceptance: An offer when accepted becomes contract. When the person to whom an offer is made signifies his assent thereto the offer is said to be accepted. Thus the essence of the acceptance is the assent or consent that is coming from the offeree . It simply speaks of giving ones consent to the offer as it is made by the offeror and as such it will be a valid acceptance to convert an offer into a contract. So the acceptance must be communicated; must be to the original proposal made otherwise it could be a counter offer takes effect on the basis of the mode of communicating the acceptance to the offeror (in postal mode- on the date posted, in case of instant or electronic mode, occurs when received). Competency of the Parties: The law does not give everyone to enter into a contract rather prescribe certain specific qualification to attain to be competent to enter into a contract. A person to be competent to enter into a contract, must be of the age of majority; of sound mind; and not disqualified from contracting by any law which he is subject. Thus negatively, the following persons cannot enter into contract: minors; persons of unsound mind; and persons disqualified by any law. Free Consent: Free consent is an essential element of a valid contract. It is natural that for an agreement all parties to it must come to a common point. There are mainly two requirements to be a consent that the consent must given- To the same thing, andIn the same sense. So if the parties So to constitute a contract even mere consent is not sufficient, rather the consent must be free consent according to law agree upon different things or in different sense then this will not be treated as consent. The term thing used in the first requirement means the contents or subject matter of agreement. On the other hand, to constitute a valid contract even mere consent is not sufficient, rather the consent must be free consent according to law. That is to say, to be a free consent, that must not be caused by, coercion, undue influence, fraud, misrepresentation and mistake. In other words, if consent is given being affected by any of the above elements, the consent will not be treated by the law as free consent. Consideration: Ordinarily consideration means mean the exchange of the price. It has different legal meaning which does not restrict it only within the area of monetary compensation rather to be consideration, law required that, something is to be done, forborne, or promised at the desire of the offeror. It may even be termed as burden discharged or in other sense sufferings in the sense of losing something, may be that is ones energy, service, money or anything valuable. A paragraph from the book Law of Contract (10thedn, Sweet and Maxwell,1999,at p.64) Professor Treitel is worth mentioning – The traditional meaning of consideration concentrates on the requirement that something of value must be given and accordingly states that †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦What the law is concentrate with is the consideration for a promise-not the consideration for a contract. So consideration is the cause of acceptance and it – Must be valuable. Something must be supplied in return of the offer of the offeror, eg. Money. Must be lawful and non gratuitous. Must not be something already paid or incurred(past consideration) Lawful Object: In order to execute a valid contract the object and consideration of a agreement must have to be lawful. The object and consideration are lawful unless- It is forbidden by law; or Is of such nature that, if permitted, it would defeat the provisions of any law; or Is fraudulent; or Involves or implies injury to any person or his property; or It is regarded as immortal or against the public policy and public welfare. Enforceability in Law: Although an agreement may have all the essential elements, it may not be a enforceable contract because of some other issues like impossibility of performance or where the agreement unduly restrains any person in his trade. So if an agreement fails to satisfy the legal requirements of a contract then that becomes nothing but unenforceable by law which cannot turn into a contract ever rather a void agreement. (P1.1). Essential elements of the contract in a given scenario: Adam, Owner of a house offers in face to face, Brad to sell his house at a certain price. Brad, accept the offer made by Adam and pay a portion of price for the house asked by him. This is an example of a valid contract entered into by Adam and Brad for the sale of the house. In this transaction we will find all the essential elements for the formation of a valid contract. Moreover the contract is executed in a lawful manner. Here, Adam made the Offer which Brad Accepts in his Free Consent and pay Adam a portion of the Consideration (price). Both the parties are Competent to execute a contract and their Object is not also lawful. So the contract of sale of house between Adam and Brad is Enforceable in Law. The impact of different types of contract: Expressed and Implied contract: If the offer and acceptance of contract are made in words, i.e, either expressed orally or in words, it is an express one. It can be of two types, i.e. Oral and Written. On the other hand when there is no formal expression of such offer and acceptance rather it is implied from the acts or omission of the parties, it is regarded as an implied contract. Valid contract: An agreement enforceable by law is a contract and is valid. That is to say, a valid contract is that agreement which fulfils all requirements of a contract as imposed by law. Voidable contract: The voidable status of a contract is a temporary status which has to be made enforceable by law or has to be set aside and both these are dependant at the option of the parties at one side and not at the option of the other side. The law determines at whose option it will be validated or annulled in each particular case considering the nature of voidable contract. Thus a contract cannot remain as voidable forever; rather it has to be valid or void. Void contract: A contract becomes void by ceasing its enforceability by law. It is not a void ab initio. Because, law says that it has to cease its enforceability and it will be void only when it will cease that enforceability. Thus, the precondition of a void contract is the existence of a valid contract and afterwards somehow its enforceability will be ceased and then it will be treated as a void contract. There may have various grounds for ceasing the enforceability of law, e.g., supervening impossibility or illegality. Unilateral and Bilateral contract: In the case of bilateral contract each party takes on an obligation, usually by promising the other for something- as for example James promise to sell something and Ben promise to buy it. By contrast an unilateral contract is one in which only one party assumes the obligation under the contract. Terms in contracts meaning and effect: 1. Express terms: A. What did the parties say or write? B. Are the statements of the parties terms of the contract. 2. Implied terms: A. Terms implied by customs: It is well established that a contract may be subjected to terms that are sanctioned by the custom, whether commercial or otherwise, they have not been expressly mentioned by the parties. Precedents states that in commercial transaction extrinsic evidence of customs and usages is admissible to annex incidents in written contracts, in matters with respect to which they are silent. B. Terms implied by statute: The translation of usages into agreement and of agreements into statutory terms is most evident in the history of the contracts for the sale of goods. Moreover the provisions of Marine Insurance Act are another example in this regard. C. Terms implied by courts: Other terms have been judicially implied in a number of transactions. Thus in Lynch v Thorne,(1956) the Court of Appeal give judgment in favor of the defendant and held that they could not imply any term that would create an inconsistency with the express language of the bargain. Such a similar position was examined by the House of Lords in Lister v Ramford Ice and Gold Storage Company Ltd and majority of the judge gave judgment in favor of the respondent. Excluding and limiting terms: The common law is quite familiar with the practice of inserting terms excluding and limiting liabilities by one party which would otherwise be his. This situation frequently arises where a documents purporting to express the terms of a contract is delivered to one of the parties and is not read by him. A passenger receives a ticket, stating the terms or referring to the terms set out elsewhere, on which a railway is prepared to carry him or take charge for his luggage. There are different view regarding such clauses. One view describes it as a promisors obligation and the other view describe it as mere defense. P1.3 Appropriate terms for a given situation: Allan, buy a ticket to go to London from Liverpool. The ticket contains terms that he can carry only 10-kilo of goods and for more than that amount he has to pay extra  £5 for per 10-kilo. This is an example of excluding clause in the contract between him and the bus company. Requirements 2: 2.1 Practical application of the elements of contract: Scenario: According to the given problem for this assignment, the following advice has been provided: Advice: In the light of various elements of a valid contract, John McGurks first telex is clearly an offer; which Collin McCellend was to accept. The general rule is that acceptance takes effect on communication and application of this rule is embodied in the cases of Entores and Brinkibon. Considering that the telex of acceptance was sent outside working hours, when should it take effect, and considering the factors mentioned in Brinkibon- intentions of the parties and standard business practice- where should the risk lie? In assessing where should the risk lie we have take into account the fact that Collin can reasonably think that his telex would be read shortly after the lunch hour was finished and to expect John to check where there is any reply from Collin. This is relevant because in other cases on communications, the court does not entertain the claim of the parties who fail to receive message because of their own fault or negligence(such as it was in Entores case). If Collins telex is deemed to take effect when it is sent, a binding contract between them exist at that point and this will take priority over the contract with ford. We should then consider the position if the rule that acceptance only takes effect on communication is strictly applied. The next issue in question is the communication by the other car dealer from whom Collin learnt that the car has been sold. It is clear from Dickinson v Dodds that information from third party can amount to revocation because the message from the third party is regarded as the offeror had said it himself. However the exception of this rule is that if the source of information is not reliable there would be no revocation and the offer would be still available for acceptance. But in the present case this exception is not applicable as the source is not untrustworthy and as such Collin cannot claim John to give effect to his acceptance. However Collin is still entitled to claim damages assuming a contract was made. He could only force John to sell the car to him if court granted specific performance. As the court grant specific performance of contract only when monetary compensation is not adequate to give the plaintiff proper remedy or where there is no other remedy available. Collin can be adequately compensated by money and this could be done by allowing Collin to claim the difference between the cars price and the cost of replacement i.e. more or less  £2000. 2.2 Law on terms in different contracts: Terms of contract can either be conditions or warranties and it vary in various contracts depending on the nature and contents of the contract. Thus terms and conditions in the contract of sale of land are different from that of sale of goods. For better understanding see Terms of Contract- Meaning and Effect part of this paper in page. 2.3 Evaluation of the effect of different terms: Three kinds of contractual terms have normative effect and significance relative to each others namely; Conditions, Warranties and Innominate terms. Conditions: These are the most importance terms of contract and have serious consequences if breached. An innocent party can repudiate a contract and claim damages for breach of such terms. It is not necessary to mark such term as conditions in the contract and court will consider the intentions of the parties to determine such terms. See e.g. Schuler AG v Wickman Machine Tools Sales Ltd. (1974). Such terms can also be determine by statutory provisions, (e.g. Sale of Goods Act 1979, provides that certain terms relating to title to goods and quality of goods are conditions) and by the case laws, typically standard terms in commercial contracts. Warranties: It is of lesser importance than conditions and breach of such terms entitled the innocent to claim damages but not to repudiate the contract. Innominate terms: It can be either conditions or warranties and breach of them can be serious or trivial depending on the particular fact and conditions. Such terms was first emerged in Hong Kong Fir Shipping Co. Ltd. v Kawasaki Ltd. (1962). See also The Mihalis Angelos case, Bunge Corp. v Tradax Export SA(1981) and The Naxos(1990). Ref.1 Requirement 3: Tort: Law of tort the law of civil wrong but every civil wrong is not tort. For a civil wrong to be tort it must contain two conditions:- The remedy is common law action for unliquidated damages and The wrong is not exclusively a breach of contract, breach of trust or other merely equitable obligation. Thus Winfield defines tortuous liability arises from the breach of the duty primarily fixed by law; †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦and its breach is repressible by an action for unliquidated damages. Ref.2 3.1 Differences between liabilities in Tort and Contract: As to the source of interest and duty: The interest in tort and its corresponding duty are created by law but in case of contract they are created by the agreement between the parties to the contract. As to the nature of duty: In tort duty not to violate the interest of another person is toward persons generally, not to any particular person. In contract such duty is only towards the parties to the contract and not towards any strangers. As to nature of remedy: In tort damages are always unliquidated but for breach of contract liquidated damages can be claimed where specified in the contract. Others: Even where unliquidated damages are claimed the principle of liability in tort and contract differ. In contract damages are of compensatory nature except in case of contract of marriage and action by trader against his banker for dishonoring his check while there is sufficient balance to his credit. In tort, on the other hand, exemplary may in certain be awarded by the court. 3.2 Nature of liability in Negligence: Generally in all torts the liability is based on intentions or negligence. An act is negligent if its consequences are neither desired nor are substantially certain but are so probable that a reasonable man would have foreseen and avoid them. Thus, in certain cases of negligence the defendant may not have knowledge of his conduct or consequences thereof, but in many cases he has knowledge of both. It is the element of desire for consequences, which can distinguish negligence from intention. In case of intention actual or presumptive desire is always there, whereas in case of negligence there can never be desire for consequences. 3.3 Vicarious liability in business: Vicarious liability means the liability for the wrong committed by another person. Normally, a person is held liable for wrongs committed by him but sometimes he may be held liable for wrongs committed by other persons. Common example of such liability are liability of master for acts of his servants, done in course of employment, liability of partners for torts committed by a fellow partners, liability of principal for acts of his agent done within the scope of authority and liability of an employer for acts of an independent contractor employed by him. Thus vicarious liability in business can be found in the business practice of agency and in partnership business. In both the cases a person who is liable for any breach of contract cannot be held liable rather the person on behalf of whom he enters into contract will be liable. Thus when there occurs any wrong or breach of any contract or any part thereof by an agent acting on behalf of and within the authority of the principal, then the principal and the agent will be held liable. The same rule applies in the case of partnership business and for the wrong of a partner the fellow partners become liable subject to certain conditions and exceptions. Thus in the case of various contracts and business dealings there arises vicarious liability. Requirement 4: 4.1 Applications of the elements of tort of negligence and defences in different business situations: There are certain general conditions which must be fulfilled or satisfied before a person can be held liable for any tort. Negligence is one of such essential elements and it has significant effect in the ordinary course of various business practices. However negligence can be both, an element as well as a defense in appropriate cases of business. Negligence as elements: Negligence is the lack of application of reasoning and ordinary prudence on the part of the defendant for, that he can be held liable for any damages results from such damages. In every business practice or in other words, contract it is the duty of both the parties to act and behave in a reasonable and wise manner and perform his obligation diligently. Thus as an independent tort negligence means the infliction of damage by breach of a legal duty to take care which the defendant owed to the plaintiff. This if there occurs any breach or any party suffer loss for the negligent act and omission of the other, it will entitled the plaintiff seek relief and damages for such negligent behave. As a defense, contributory negligence: Contributory negligence is a special defense to an action for negligence. When any breach, damage or accidents occurs not solely due to the negligence of the defendant but also partly due to the lack of ordinary care on the plaintiffs part, the part of the negligence of the plaintiff is called contributory negligence because it also contributes towards bringing about of the consequence. The defense of the contributory negligence will fail if there is no lack of reasonable care and attention on the plaintiffs part. However the scope of the defense was already narrowed by invention of the rule of last opportunity in Davis v Mann (1842) case. It was further limited by extension of the last opportunity rule to situations where actually the defendant was not in a position to avoid the accident but he lost the opportunity because of some of fault on his part. Thus the leading case is, British Columbia Electric Rly v Loach(1916). 4.2 Applications of the elements of vicarious liability in given business situations: A, is appointed as agent for B for certain activities with the authority to enter into contract of selling As car. A enters into a contract with C for selling the car for  £2500. However after the compellation of the contract it is discovered by A that the car has certain defects which was unknown to A and hence C claims damages. In such a situation A is not liable for the act done by him as he has acted upon and within authority of B. Here not a rather B is vicariously liable and C can sue B, not for his claim. Concluding Remarks: Though sources of interest in contract and tort are different yet they may co-exist or concur in the same case. In such case interest is created by the contract as well as general law. In the realm of modern business practices contractual obligations and its breach are so much important and in this regard to get proper remedy and appropriate its very much essential to have clear and sound knowledge on contractual obligations, liabilities along with various liabilities of tort law.

Historical Inaccuracies in the Movie Braveheart

The movie Barveheart in 1995, which was starred, produced and directed by Academy Award winner Mel Gibson, depicted (or tried to depict) the life of Scottish hero and patriot Sir William Wallace. The film gained worldwide recoginition, has won five Academy Awards including best picture and best director, and was nominated for another five. It also sparked the interest of many in Scottish history. The film, however, was also criticized about its historical inaccuracies.Indeed, according to historian Elizabeth Ewan, the film â€Å"almost totally sacrifices historical accuracy for epic adventure. † Sharon Krossa pointed out that in the film, â€Å"the events aren't accurate, the dates aren't accurate, the characters aren't accurate, the names aren't accurate, the clothes aren't accurate—in short, just about nothing is accurate. † Without proper information and understanding of the actual events in Scotland during the time of William Wallace's exploits, one would thi nk that the presentation in the movie is how it really happened during that time.Not much is really known about the life of William Wallace that even the date of his birth is a subject of debate among historians. And much of what is known is based on a fifteenth century poem by aperson known as the Minstrel or Blind Harry. It is the purpose of this paper to present historical facts during the time of William Wallace in contrast to those that were presented in the film. During the beginning of the film, there appears a text stating: â€Å"SCOTLAND 1280 A. D. †, followed by a narration: â€Å"I shall tell you of William Wallace.Historians from England will say I am a liar, but history is written by those who have hanged heroes. The king of Scotland had died without a son, and the king of England, a cruel pagan known as Edward the Longshanks, claimed the throne of Scotland for himself. Scotland's nobles fought him and fough each other over the crown. So Longshanks invited them to talks of truce—no weapons, one page only. Among the farmers of that shire was Malcolm Wallace, a commoner with his own lands. He had two sons—John and William†¦Ã¢â‚¬  This very statement would already have made the film far from fact. As Krossa points out, â€Å"it is the historians from Scotland, far more than from England, who will recognize the errors of the narrator/film. † There is no doubt that the â€Å"king of Scotland† mentioned was King Alexander III. But not only was the â€Å"king of Scotland† not dead in 1280, both of his sons were alive and well, and had an heir to the throne that had outlived him for four years. King Alexander III fell from his horse and broke his neck causing his death .True enough that all of his children—two sons and a daughter—were already dead during that time, but it didn't happen until 1986, six years from the film's 1280. The death of Alexander brought Scotland in a political crisis but its nobles acknowledged Margaret, Alexander's three-year-old Norwegian granddaughter—the product of his daughter's maariage to the King of Norway—and his only direct descendant, as inheritor of the kingdom. They appointed a Committee of Guardians â€Å"to govern in the name of the young queen.† However, the two leading claimants of the kingship after Margaret, Robert Bruce of Annandale and John Baliol of Galloway, together with other nobles, apparently refused to â€Å"submit to a female sovereign, especially if she was a child,† and the country was soon â€Å"distracted by the intrigues and conspiracies of the competitors for the crown† . The guardians of England appealed to Edward I, then King of England, to intervene. King Eric II of Norway, the father of Margaret, also asked Edward I's aid to vindicate his daughter's rights.They agreed to marry Margaret, the Maid of Norway, to Edward I's son, the then Prince of Wales, with the view of uniting the crowns of England and Scotland. In 1290, Margaret embarked for Scotland to marry the Prince of Wales but fell sick during the voyage and died at Orkneys at a tender age of merely eight years. This renewed the disputes between claimants. In 1291, Edward I met the nobles of Scotland, apparently to act as arbitrator, but demanded the Scots to recognize his overlordship. This must have been the basis of the film's â€Å"talks of truce†.Recognizing that they do not have the army to oppose Edward I had he decided to invade Scotland instead, the Scots, after long deliberation, finally agreed to recognize Edward I's overlordship. Edward I then finally awarded the Scottish crown to John de Baliol. John de Baliol soon found out that â€Å"the crown which he had obtained by means of a base concession had only transformed him from a poweful noble into the slave of an imperious and exacting master. † He soon revolted against the English crown.Edward launched his armies to Scotl and and on 1296, finally defeated the Scottish army at Dunbar. He demanded â€Å"nothing less than the total surrender† of John de Baliol and his kingdom. Incapable of resistance, the king of Scotland resigned his kingdom into the hands of Edward I. Considering the facts stated above, it was not until 1296 A. D. that the Scots had an actual armed conflict with the English through John de Baliol's short-lived rebellion, and when Edward the Longshanks â€Å"claimed the throne of Scotland for himself†, sixteen years later than the film's 1280 A.D. Edward the Longshanks is also not a pagan. Being the king of England, he is, in fact, a Christian—a fact that is evidenced by the ceremony of coronation. As John Steane explains: â€Å"the king was invested by the Archbishop of Canterbury with spiritual power as God's annointed, like the kings of Israel before him. Henceforward, the king was set aart from his subjects, at least on a par with, and to some extent superior to, churchmen. † It would be imprudent to think the Archbishop of Canterbury would annoint a non-Christian as King of England.Furthermore, he did not invite the Scottish nobles for â€Å"talks of truce† but presented himself as an arbitrator, which was perhaps a response to an earlier appeal made by the Scots, to the internal conflicts of the Scots themselves. That King Edward I took advantage of the political turmoil that has engulfed Scotland may be true enough but the manner of which it has been presented in the film is nowhere near from truth. The widely accepted, though still debated, father of William Wallace was Malcolm Wallace of Ellerslie, who was descended from ancient knights and baronets of Craigie and who himself is a Scottish knight.Sir Malcolm Wallace was of noble family and not â€Å"a commoner with his own lands. † Although there are sources that say Malcolm Wallace has only two sons, it is also widely accepted that he has at least three sons, an d in any case, Malcolm (same name as the father) or Andrew was the name of the eldest son, William would be the second son while John would be the youngest when Malcolm is presented to have three sons (compare with the film in which John is presented as being older than William).John has also outlived William by two years, compared with the film in which John was presented to have died when William was still a young boy. It should be also noted that Sir Malcolm Wallace (the father) was still alive in 1291, when the Scottish nobles met with Edward I (in contrast with the film wherein he died in 1280). He was one of those who did not accept the claim of overlordship of Edward I and went into self-exile.The inaccuracies stated above happened only during the first few minutes of the film and already there are a lot of them. As the story depicted in the film progresses, there would still be a lot more of inaccuracies. The inaccuracies, however, may be based on the different versions of t he accounts on the life of William Wallace—it has already been stipulated that much of his life is unknown that even the date of his birth is debated.We have already established that Edward I was not able to claim Scotland for himself until 1296. However, in 1291, after he misled the nobles of Scotland that he would act as an arbitrator but instead asserted his overlordship and the nobles had to swear allegiance to him, different towns and fortresses of Scotland had already been garrisoned by English soldiers (still 11 years later than the faulty 1280, although, in the film, there appears nothing that suggest that English garrisons were present in Scotland).The English soldiers, considering themselves masters of Scotland, treated the people with great contempt and cruelty, took from them by force whatever they had a fancy to (which most probably include sexual advances), and if the owners offered resistance, they were abused, beat, and sometimes killed; for which acts of viol ence the english authorities neither checked nor punished.Brawls were frequent occurences between the inhabitants and the soldiers and Wallace seldom remained inactive to those which came under his notice, compared with the film's depiction of Scots being totally submissive to such abuses and the depicion of Wallace as a reluctant patriot. It should also be noted that even as a young man, Wallace already displayed his indignation with the English, not only until his wife was murdered as was depicted in the film.Fact of the matter is that he was outlawed even before the Battle of Dunbar in 1296 where the English had totally defeated King John Baliol's forces and King Edward has taken the throne for himself. He would have been 20-24 years of age during this time if we consider his birth to be between 1272 to 1276, and 15-19 when the English had started setting up garrisons in Scotland.William Wallace â€Å"had witnessed as a boy the independence, the security and the happiness of his country, under the reign of Alexander, and the contrast which he† beheld upon the establishment of English garrisons that roused the feelings in his heart which have â€Å"been animated by a love of liberty and a hatred of tyranny and dissimulation, that nothing but death could extinguish. † The same is true for most of the Scots during that time. Prima Nocte, or the right for a lord to bed the bride on the first night of her wedding day, was also mentioned in the film.It was presented to be one of the oppressions made by the English to the â€Å"sons of Scotland. † The Jus Primae Noctis, or the law of first night, was introduced in the fifteenth century medieval Europe, at least a century later from the death of William Wallace. It was apparently â€Å"developed by the lords and used as humiliating signs of superiority over the dependent peasants. † Edward the Longshanks, in the film, said that â€Å"the problem about Scotland is that it is full of Scot s. † He further asserts that â€Å"if we can't drive them out, we'll breed them out.† Thus, in the film, Prima Nocte was justified as a means to â€Å"breed out† the Scots from Scotland. It is not in the interest of Edward I, however, to â€Å"drive out† the Scots, but, perhaps, only to invade them and expand his territory. There are, in fact, many Scottish nobles that held land in England, regardless they were granted these lands in exchange of them swearing allegiance to the English Crown, much as there were English nobles who held lands in Scotland. However, there are little, if not none at all, evidence that Jus Primae Noctis was practiced in the fifteenth century, much less during the time of William Wallace.While rape and murder most certainly occurred during the English exploits in Scotland, Prima Nocte most probably did not. It is flagrantly adulturous in the eyes of the Church and England, being a Christian country, could not tolerate such an abus e, much less putting it into a law. For most historians, Prima Nocta is but a myth. Even some of the momentous events in the history of Scotland with a major participation of Sir William Wallace was depicted in the film with much inaccuracies.There are two major battles depicted in the film—the Battle of Stirling Bridge and the Battle of Falkirk—which were both parts of the Scottish Wars of Independence. It is very easy to notice that the film did not include a bridge in the Battle of Stirling Bridge, which, as the name already implies, includes a bridge. Perhaps the creators of the film mistook this particular battle for the Battle of Stirling which happened in 1648, more than three centuries after the death of William Wallace.It is important to note that the bridge itself was a major factor for the victory of the Scots against the English during that battle, that despite the advantage in numbers of the English army the Scots still prevailed. The English would have to cross the bridge, which at that time was so narrow that it could be crossed only with at most two horses abreast at a time and would have taken the them several hours to cross, after which they would enter a narrow loop in the River Forth that will leave their flank dangerously exposed to attack even before they were ready for battle, thereby nullifying their advantage in numbers.The participation of Andrew Murray was also not included in the film. Also in contrast with the film, the battle did not commence when Wallace arrived at the scene. Fact is that Wallace's and Murray's armies were already waiting on the opposite bank of the river when the English, headed by John de Warrene, Earl of Surrey, arrived at Stirling Bridge. Even after that, Warrene decides to delay crossing the bridge for several days to allow for negotiations.Two Dominican friars were sent to Wallace to demand their surrender with which Wallace replied: â€Å"Tell your commander that we are not here to make peac e but to do battle, defend ourselves and liberate our kingdom. Let them come on, and we shall prove this in their very beards. † Compared with the film, this speech was more solemn and educated, not a taunting challenge. The English, confident of their advantage in numbers and military superiority, were surprised by the refusal of the Scots to surrender and on the 11th of September 1297 decided to cross the bridge.Wallace's speech in the film was not characteristic of nobles during the thirteenth century or at any other time, not with â€Å"kiss his own arse† language. Compare also the film's presentation that the English negotiated with other Scottish nobles when it was with Wallace they negotiated with. The film also depicted those Scottish nobles introducing Wallace to the English lords when, fact of the matter is, Wallace had already gained popularity at that time with the Scots and the English alike. The Battle of Falkirk also suffered much inaccuracies in the film .In the film, Wallace used the schiltrons to resist the enemy's heavy infantry at the Battle of Stirling Bridge. Although, Wallace really used long spears to achieve his victory, the schiltron was never really used in that particular battle. Instead the schiltron was used at the Battle of Falkirk, from which the film failed to include. Wallace had no need for the schiltron at the Battle of Stirling Bridge as it is mainly a defensive tactic against heavy cavalry. Although the English started moving first by crossing the Stirling Bridge, it was really Wallace who started the attack.On the otherhand, Wallace knew he was at a disadvantage at Falkirk and readied his men in a defensive formation, which was mainly with the use of schiltrons. Knowing that the cavalry is useless against the schiltron, Edward I ordered his cavalry to attack the Scottish archers. Edward I did not order to loose arrows with his infantry in a melee with the Scots, as was depicted in the film. Instead, he ordered the arrows loose upon the schiltrons, which were in no position for defense against such attack.It was in such manner that the Scots were defeated in the said battle, which the film failed to present properly. It is true enough that the Scottish cavalry, under the command of the other nobles, â€Å"shamelessly rode off the field, without a blow being given or taken,† but detail by detail, the film's depiction of the Battle of Falkirk is in no way accurate. As for clothing and armor, the poem by Blind Harry gives us a short description as to how William Wallace looks like in battle: A habergione under his goune he war, A steylle capleyne in his bonet but marr;His glowis of plait in claith war couerit wiell In his doublet a closs coler of steyle; His face he kepit, for it was euir bar, With his twa handis, the quhilk full worthi war. † George Grant gives us a simple explanation. The habergione was a sort of chain-mail or ring-mail, extremely light and flexible, allowing the greatest freedom to the motions of the wearer, whether on foot or horseback. It was brought into Scotland by the crusaders in the beginning of the reign of Alexander III. During the period of Wallace, they appear to have been in general use both in England and Scotland.The goune was the surcoat, or coat of arms. It was a long, loose dress, without sleeves, open before and behind for the convenience of riding, and girted round the waist by the cingulum militare or belt. It was commonly worn by noblemen. The steylle capleyne, or iron hat had a rim and convex crown and was worn over a hood. The limbs were defended by being encased in boiled leather. Wallace also wore knee-plates of iron and guards for the shin-bones. His shield was round or triangular, would also have been made of iron (not wood as the film depicted).He also kept a dagger folded back under the arm, between the wrist and the elbow, when not in use, and concealed and secured in that position by the cloth of gloves wh ich appears to have worn over his glowis of plait, or arm-plate. His favorite weapon was a two-handed sword, or claymore, which his great strength enabled him to wield with ease. The mace and spear was sometimes also used by him. Paintings and sculptures of Wallace depict him in much the same way as described above. Wallace, in the film was wearing leather armor and kilts, very much in contrast with historical facts.No one wore kilts during his time as it were not introduced until in the sixteenth century, three centuries later after his death. Instead, the Scots who were lesser in standing wore tunics, its nobles were culturally similar with their English counterparts and would have dressed like them. There are much more historical inaccuracies in the film. The bottomline is that the film really is of an epic adventure genre, something short of a fantasy, not a historical presentation. A few mistakes on the details would be forgivable, but to change the story based on facts, an in a grand scale besides, deserves to be rejected as historical.Krossa suggests not to believe anything depicted in the film if one is truly intrested in what really happened during that time. There are elements in the film that coincide with history but that the elements leading up to those coincidences would need to be properly explained to fit to the real history, which the film obviously failed to present. She said that â€Å"it is far safer, and far more efficient, to just ignore the whole film, as regards history, and read a good Scottish history instead. † She adds, however, â€Å"to enjoy the film†¦by all means—just as one enjoys Star Wars or any other work of imagination—simply do not mistake it for history. † Bibliography BBC. â€Å"The Battle of Stirling Bridge—Factsheet. † Available from http://www. bbc. co. uk/history/scottishhistory/independence/trails_independence_stirlingbridge. shtml. Internet; accessed May 4, 2008. Edgar, John George. Memorable Events of Modern History. (1862) Ewan, Elizabeth. â€Å"Braveheart. † American Historical Review 100, no. 4 (1995): 1219–1221. Grant, George. The Life and Adventures of Sir William Wallace: The Liberator of Scotland. Dublin: James M'Glashan (1849) Kock, John T.Celtic Culture: A Historical Encyclopedia. ABC-CLIO (2006). Krossa, Sharon L. â€Å"Braveheart Errors: An Illustration of Scale. † Medieval Scotland (2002). Krossa, Sharon L. â€Å"Regarding the Film Braveheart. † Medieval Scotland (2001). Mitchison, Rosalind. A History of Scotland. Routledge, 2002. Rodger, Robert. Documents Illustrative of Sir William Wallace, His Life and Times. (1841) Rowan, Frederica. History of Scotland. 1851. Steane, John. The Archeology of the Medieval English Monarchy. Routledge, 1999. Wettlaufer, Jorg. â€Å"The jus primae noctis as a male power display: A review of historic sources with

Community Health Social Care Essay

Welcome to the Foundation Degree in Community Health and Social Care offered in partnership with a number of Further Education colleges, and validated by the University of Wolverhampton. Foundation Degrees are a vocationally focused higher education qualification located at intermediate level in the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications. This foundation degree has links with local and national employers ensuring that skills are developed through work-based learning, which is a major part of any foundation degree. This combined with higher-level knowledge and understanding reinforces and supports the development of vocational skills. Although the University of Wolverhampton has validated the foundation degree, the study will take place in one of the partner colleges. In the following pages you will find a brief description of the programme, the modules and other information that we think you will find useful. More detailed information about each module will be given by module leaders during your studies. We have also included details of awards that you may wish to progress onto after you complete the foundation degree. We work closely with the course leaders in all colleges. Arrangements will be made for you to visit the University. We look forward to seeing you then. If you have any issues or concerns that you wish to discuss please contact your course leader at your college. 2About this Guide The purpose of this guide is to provide you with information about the modules offered within the Foundation Degree. In addition to the information contained in this Pathway Guide, you will need to be aware of: The University Academic Principles and Regulations, which are available from the university web site. These regulations explain how the credit system operates, and the number of credits that must be studied at different levels in order to qualify for the different awards offered. Each college will arrange their own timetable – the course leader at your college will make you aware of this. All modules on the Foundation Degree in Community Health and Social Care are compulsory. On successful completion of the Foundation Degree, you will be awarded a ‘pass’. The University can also provide you with a formal transcript of your module results if you wish. If you decide to complete end your studies after successfully completing year One, you may be eligible for a Certificate of Higher Education. At the end of this guide you will find information on further study at the University of Wolverhampton. Introduction to the Health and Social Care Subjects The Foundation Degree provides an educational opportunity for undergraduates who come from a variety of backgrounds. The Foundation Degree aims to provide appropriate academic health and social care teaching for a wide variety of students, from across the NHS and the health and social care arena. The award may be studied on a full or part time basis. Full details of this can be found by asking the contact at your local college. We may be able to award some students credits for specific modules if they can demonstrate that they have already met the learning objectives. This is known as Accreditation of Prior Achievement. Please discuss this with the tutor at your college in the first instance. It is expected that all student will have work experience (this can be paid or unpaid) within the Health or Social Care field.

3 Sentences That Confuse Instead of Explain

3 Sentences That Confuse Instead of Explain 3 Sentences That Confuse Instead of Explain 3 Sentences That Confuse Instead of Explain By Mark Nichol In each of the following sentences, the manner in which the statement is constructed hinders rather than aids comprehension. In each example, discussion describes the problem, and a revision provides a solution. 1. To what extent are you expected to know your customers, a term that refers to identifying and validating client identity? â€Å"Know your customers† is referenced in this sentence as a concept, not as a term for a concept, so the definition of the implied term should be set off as an entirely distinct parenthetical (perhaps even defined in a footnote): â€Å"To what extent are you expected to know your customers? (The phrase ‘know your customer’ refers to identifying and validating client identity.)† Alternatively, to avoid the issue, revise to something like â€Å"To what extent are you expected to adhere to the know-your-customer principle, which pertains to identifying and validating client identity?† 2. Supervising flight operations in the control car or gondola, Pruss ordered the Hindenburg back down the Jersey Shore coastline. The location of the person supervising flight operations is described as â€Å"the control car or gondola,† but there are two problems with this description. First, the phrase includes two alternate names for a single location, but it is incorrectly uninterrupted by parenthetical punctuation, suggesting that the entire phrase represents a single term. Second, why use the more familiar term followed by a more technical one? Doing so in that order renders the latter superfluous. Better to introduce the less well-known term, followed by the first term as a helpful parenthetical gloss: â€Å"Supervising flight operations in the gondola, or control car, Pruss ordered the Hindenburg back down the Jersey Shore coastline.† 3. The EPA’s regulatory reform task force’s pending 30-day public comment period is intended to gather such input. Avoid stacking two possessive constructions in sequence. Here, the first possessive can easily be converted to an adjective: â€Å"The EPA regulatory reform task force’s pending 30-day public comment period is intended to gather such input.† Better yet, however, reorder the sentence to eliminate one apostrophized term: â€Å"The pending 30-day public comment period established by the EPA’s regulatory reform task force is intended to gather such input.† Want to improve your English in five minutes a day? Get a subscription and start receiving our writing tips and exercises daily! Keep learning! Browse the Style category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:75 Contronyms (Words with Contradictory Meanings)8 Writing Tips for BeginnersMay Have vs. Might Have

Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions

Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions These resolutions were written by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison in response to the Alien and Sedition Acts. These resolutions were the first attempts by states rights advocates to impose the rule of nullification. In their version, they argued that since the government was created as a compact of the states, they had the right to ‘nullify’ laws that they felt exceeded the granted power of the Federal government. Four Measures of the Alien and Sedition Acts The Alien and Sedition acts were passed while  John Adams  was serving as Americas second president. Their purpose was to fight against criticisms people were making against the government and more specifically the Federalists.  The Acts consist of four measures designed to limit immigration and free speech. They include: The Naturalization Act  - This act increased the residency time for individuals applying for U.S. citizenship. Immigrants would have to live in the US for 14 years in order to be eligible for citizenship. Previous to this, the requirement was 5 years. The reason for this act was that America was in danger of going to war with France. This would give the president the ability to better deal with suspicious foreign nationals.  The Alien Act  - Following the passage of the Naturalization Act, the Alien Act continued to give more power to the presidency over foreign nationals living in the U.S. The president was given the ability to deport aliens during peacetime.The Alien Enemy Act  - A little less than a month later, President Adams signed this Act into law. The purpose of the Alien Enemy Act was to give the president the ability to expel or imprison aliens during times of declared war if those aliens had ties to Americas enemies.  The  Sedition Act  - The final act, pass ed on July 14, 1798, was the most controversial. Any conspiracy against the government including riots and interference with officers would result in a high misdemeanor. This went so far as to stop people from speaking in a false, scandalous and malicious manner against the government.  Newspaper, pamphlet and broadside publishers who printed articles aimed primarily at his administration were the intended targets. The backlash to these acts was probably the main reason why  John Adams  was not elected to a second term as president. The Virginia Resolutions, authored by James Madison, argued that Congress was overstepping their bounds and using a power not delegated to them by the Constitution. The Kentucky Resolutions, authored by Thomas Jefferson, argued that states had the power of nullification, the ability to nullify federal laws. This would later be argued by John C. Calhoun and the southern states as the Civil War neared. However, when the topic came up again in 1830, Madison argued against this idea of nullification.   In the end, Jefferson was able to use the reaction to these acts to ride to the presidency, defeating John Adams in the process.

Demoracy and War Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Demoracy and War - Research Paper Example In that direction, as hypothesized by various thinkers, democracies may maximally avoid indulging in war with other fellow democratic countries. So, this paper focusing on the theoretical bases for the hypothesis regarding the absence of war between democratic states, will compare the theories behind this hypothesis, including how they are complementary as well as competitive. The theories and theoretical concepts put forward by various thinkers on the above mentioned hypothesis of democratic countries avoiding wars within themselves, are constituted under Democratic peace theory. Also, known as liberal democratic theory or simply called as "democratic peace", this theory is being analyzed by various study groups in both in the current political contexts as well as historical contexts. The theory and the related hypothesis had origins in the 18th century itself, through the works of Immanuel Kant, but came into more prominent circulation and were also scientifically evaluated after 1 960s only. Kant foreshadowed the basis of this theory in 1795 in his essay named, Perpetual Peace, in which he hypothesized that if the geographical territories or countries are constitutional republics, voted by common people, then there are good chances of actualizing perpetual peace. Immanuel Kant (1795) argued that â€Å"majority of the people would never vote to go to war unless it was in self defense; that if all nations were republics, it would end war, because there would be no aggressors.† (cited in Okoth, 2008). This hypothesis came into more prominence and research study in the second half of the 20th century, after the Second World War, as more democracies came into existence throughout the world. If viewed from another perspective, thinkers supporting the democracy peace theory state that due to the rise of many democracies only major wars or even Third World War has not taken place. As Barkawi and Laffey (1999) states â€Å"a defining feature of world politics in the late 20th century is the decline in the frequency of warfare between industrialized states†, with the existence of a ‘zone of peace’ between the democratic countries being attributed as the main reason. This hypothesis is further supported by a number of recent wars or conflicts, as it primarily took place between non-democratic countries or between one democratic country and a non-democratic country, but not between two democracies. For example, both the Wars in the Gulf involving Iraq in 1992 and 2003 were between an authoritarian regime and a coalition of democracies, and it is the same in the case of Afghanistan. Even the earlier wars in Korea and Vietnam involved communist regimes. However, when one views the perspective of thinkers having contrary opinions to this Democratic theory, there are exceptions to this hypothesis. For example, the Kargil War that took place between India and Pakistan in 1999 involved democracies, as well as the Israel-Egypt c onflict. Although there were exceptions, democracies avoid going to war with fellow democracies due to some valid reasons. Democracies are mainly viewed as the best outcome of wars and other independence or liberation or resistance struggles. That is, in the aftermath of major wars and struggles, country

Establishing Money Exchange and Transfer Business Research Proposal

Establishing Money Exchange and Transfer Business - Research Proposal Example UAE has an extensive record of the money changers who are involved in exchange of foreign currencies and remittance. The process of remittances took place in the form of a third party money payment system, where the person may pass on the currency to the second party located within or outside the country. This service was utilized heavily by the emigrants in UAE. In the other countries money changers are prohibited, while in UAE and the other Gulf countries they are regulated, licensed, and supervised by the central bank. The money exchange and transfer industry in UAE comprises of more than 212 offices. These money changers utilize the banks, exchange houses, and even agents to take and receive remittances. Â  This system might appear to be informal, but they are formal contractual agreements, and their business is legal and well-established in UAE. The currency of UAE is Dirhams which is linked to the US Dollar. However, Dirham has remained constant more than a period of 20 years (Campbell, 2007, p. 354). Even the foreign exchange market in UAE is not centrally controlled by specific exchange. It is mainly run by the bank through ‘over-the counter’ and by the companies who trade in currencies. The currency brokers are there in the market to offer good deal in foreign exchange because the exchange rate is not the same. There are different prices on which currency is traded depending on the rates offered by the banks or companies into trading and fund transferring business.