Legal aspect refers to an instance where a legal action is employed where necessary. It mostly occurs where people violate other people’s properties or rights. The ultimate aim of this context is to outline the facts of the case, which include the definitive and the plaintive, the legal action to be undertaken and the claim that can be made. It then examines the problem of the case argued from the plaintiff’s point of view and from the definitive’s point of view. It concludes by giving the right decision required for this case considering both the facts and the law.
Facts of the Case
The definitive is the business investor who used to purchase businesses that were in financial crisis. The plaintive on the other hand are Harris and Danzil who pretended to be working for the investor only to display their interest by purchasing the manufacturing firm’s shares through paying $3.1 that was $100,000 more than what the investor had given out. The investor was right to take the matter to the court because Harris and Danzil had infringed his right of purchase. Therefore, there is no doubt that this case was a civil case.
The issue of the case
The problem of the case is the fact that Harris and Danzil had infringed the rights of the investor who was the initial person to approach the manufacturing firm that was in crisis for purchasing their shares. He then employed Harris to assess the financial status of the firm before he pumped in his cash. Harris on the other hand suggested that he was going to assess the financial status of the firm but there should be a person to assess the firm’s equipments and possessions. Therefore, Harris suggested that Danzil be contracted and the investor agreed. However, after assessing the required information, the two put ahead their interests and decided to purchase the shares before the investor could realize. The investor then decided to take legal action because the two had breached the contract he had given them.
Argument for Plaintive
The plaintive who is the investor wanted to purchase the shares of the manufacturing firm that had financial crisis. According to the investor, Harris and Danzil were only required to perform their duty, which he had been contracted to do. They were not supposed to show any interest in it but if it was necessary to show interest, it should have been done using the right procedure like informing the investor who would then decide what to do about it. However, they decided to do things in accordance to their own interest and mess up. Therefore, they must face the law for breaching the contract policy.
Argument for Definitive
The definitive who are Harris and Danzil argued that their shares are the ones that granted them the shares of the manufacturing firm. The investor had little money that required by the company but since they had enough, they gave it out. The investor only had $3.0 million while Harris and Danzil had $3.1 million. Therefore, it is clear that they definitive had much money than the plaintive.
The right decision for the Case
According to the law, breaching contract is unlawful and such a case should be handled by the court of law, which should determine the consequences of the infringers. Note that the court in this case should not determine the case; it should determine the outcome, the period through which the definitive should serve in prison or the respective fine that they should pay for it. Therefore, since the definitive violated the law concerning contracts, they should be fined about half a million dollars or be imprisoned for not less than one year so that they do not attempt such an action again. That is the best civil action that needs to be taken by the Supreme Court.