Renting, also known as hiring or letting, is an agreement where a payment is made for the use of a good, service or property owned by another over a fixed period of time. To maintain such an agreement, a rental agreement is signed to establish the roles and expectations of both the tenant and landlord. There are many different types of leases. The type and terms of a lease are decided by the landlord and agreed upon by the renting tenant. For more information on types of leases, check the "Rental Agreements" details below. Likewise, for types of rentable goods, check the "Reasons for Renting" and "Leasing" sections of this article.
In the United States, a car dealership is a business that sells cars. A car dealership can either be a franchised dealership selling new and used cars, or a used car dealership, selling only used cars. In most cases, dealerships provide car maintenance and repair services as well as trade-in, leasing, and financing options for customers.
A hire purchase (HP), also known as an installment plan, is an arrangement whereby a customer agrees to a contract to acquire an asset by paying an initial installment and repaying the balance of the price of the asset plus interest over a period of time. Other analogous practices are described as closed-end leasing or rent to own.
A rental agreement is a contract of rental, usually written, between the owner of a property and a renter who desires to have temporary possession of the property; it is distinguished from a lease, which is more typically for a fixed term. As a minimum, the agreement identifies the parties, the property, the term of the rental, and the amount of rent for the term. The owner of the property may be referred to as the lessor and the renter as the lessee.
Bell v Lever Brothers Ltd [1931] UKHL 2 is an English contract law case decided by the House of Lords. Within the field of mistake in English law, it holds that common mistake does not lead to a void contract unless the mistake is fundamental to the identity of the contract.
English contract law is the body of law that regulates legally binding agreements in England and Wales. With its roots in the lex mercatoria and the activism of the judiciary during the industrial revolution, it shares a heritage with countries across the Commonwealth, from membership in the European Union, continuing membership in Unidroit, and to a lesser extent the United States. Any agreement that is enforceable in court is a contract. A contract is a voluntary obligation, contrasting to the duty to not violate others rights in tort or unjust enrichment. English law places a high value on ensuring people have truly consented to the deals that bind them in court, so long as they comply with statutory and human rights.
Car finance refers to the various financial products which allow someone to acquire a car, including car loans and leases.
Shogun Finance Ltd v Hudson [2003] UKHL 62 is an English contract law case decided in the House of Lords, on the subject of mistaken identity as a basis for rescission of a contract. The case has been the subject of much criticism in failing to effectively clarify the area of mistake to identity.
Royscot Trust Ltd v Rogerson[1991] EWCA Civ 12 is an English contract law case on misrepresentation. It examines the Misrepresentation Act 1967 and addresses the extent of damages available under s 2(1) for negligent misrepresentation.
DHN Food Distributors Ltd v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council [1976] 1 WLR 852 is a UK company law case where, on the basis that a company should be compensated for loss of its business under a compulsory acquisition order, a group was recognised as a single economic entity. It stands as a liberal example of when UK courts may lift the veil of incorporation of a company.
Personal contract purchase (PCP), often referred to as a personal contract plan, is a form of hire purchase vehicle finance for individual purchasers, similar to both personal contract hire and a traditional hire purchase.
Allan James Hubbard was a businessman who lived in Timaru in the South Island of New Zealand, and was the founder of South Canterbury Finance, New Zealand's largest locally owned finance company. In 2006, the New Zealand Listener described Hubbard as the most powerful businessman in the South Island.
Karsales (Harrow) Ltd v Wallis [1956] EWCA Civ 4 is an English Court of Appeal decision which established fundamental breach as a major English contract law doctrine. Denning LJ MR gave the leading judgment replacing the Rule of Strict Construction, which require a literal approach to the construction of contract terms.
South Canterbury Finance was New Zealand's largest locally owned finance company when it collapsed in August 2010, triggering a $1.6 billion bail-out of investors deposits by the New Zealand Government; almost $1b was recovered by receivers.
Couch v Branch Investments (1969) Limited [1980] 2 NZLR 314 is an often cited case regarding the temporary forbearance of taking legal action on enforcing a debt as being consideration to enter into a new contract with the creditor. It reinforces the English case of Callisher v Bischoffsheim (1870) LR 5 QB 449.
Polymer Developments Group Ltd v Tilialo [2002] 3 NZLR 258 is a New Zealand case regarding the legality of contracts created to prevent a prosecution, which unlike the earlier similar precedents of Mall Finance v Slater [1976] 2 NZLR 685 and Barsdell v Kerr [1979] 2 NZLR 731, in this case however, although the contract was clearly illegal, relief was granted to the creditor.
The Illegal Contracts Act [1970] is a New Zealand law that manages how contracts are deemed illegal under either common law or under Statute.
NZI Bank Ltd v Euro-National Corp Ltd [1992] 3 NZLR 528 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding whether a contract illegal under law, can be subsequently validated under the Illegal Contracts Act 1970.
Catley v Herbert [1988] 1 NZLR 606 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding whether a contract illegal under law, can be subsequently validated under the Illegal Contracts Act 1970.
Cavendish Square Holding BV v Talal El Makdessi[2015] UKSC 67, together with its companion case ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis, are English contract law cases concerning the validity of penalty clauses and the application of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Directive. The UK Supreme Court ruled on both cases together on 4 November 2015, updating the established legal rule on penalty clauses and replacing the test of whether or not a disputed clause is "a genuine pre-estimate of loss" with a test asking whether it imposed a proportionate detriment in relation to any "legitimate interest" of the innocent party.
