Anita sold and delivered an automobile to Marvin, a minor. Marvin, during his minority, returned the automobile to Anita, saying that he disaffirmed the sale. Anita accepted the automobile and said she would return the purchase price to Marvin the next day. Later in the day, Marvin changed his mind, took the automobile without Anita’s knowledge, and sold it to Chris. Anita had not returned the purchase price when Marvin took the car. On what theory, if any, can Anita recover from Marvin? Explain.
Individual M initially decided to disaffirm the contract made with Individual A, which was agreed upon by the latter. Individual A also agreed to pay back the purchase amount to Individual M. Individual M has used the concept of disaffirmation to change their mind on the purchase of the car. But after doing so, Individual M sold the automobile to Individual C. No new contract is created here and the sale was beyond legal aspects. Individual M cannot use disaffirmation here since their only right is to the purchase price of the car. Individual M had performed a tortious act and is liable for it.
Individual A can recover from Individual M on the grounds of liability of tort connected with contract.
Assignment Writers are Online Now!
Need to pay someone to write your paper from scratch? We have experts for all types of assignments.