Their Eyes Were Watching God Essay -- essays research papers

Love and Marriage   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Their Eyes Were Watching God by Zora Neale Hurston is a novel about a Southern black woman and her experiences through life. Janie, the main character, is forced at a young age by her grandmother, into an arranged marriage with a man named Logan. Janie is told to learn to love Logan, but the love never comes for Logan in Janie's heart so she leaves him. She meets a man named Joe. Soon after they are married. Joe was sweet at first, then his true feelings about women come out and Janie looses her love she thought she had for him. He soon dies after their separation. Janie then falls in love with a man named Tea Cake. He is the man with whom she has a wonderful, loving, happy marriage. Janie, through youth and lack of empowerment, is mislead to believe other people's definitions of love and marriage until she is strong enough to find a relationship on her own which satisfies her personal definitions of love and marriage.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Nanny, Janie's grandmother, leads her to believe that love comes after marriage though love is secondary to the security marriage provides. Nanny feels marriage was simply for security and to start a family. 'Taint Logan Killicks Ah wants you to have baby, it's protection.';(pg. 14). Nanny says this to Janie before her arranged marriage to Logan. Nanny wants Janie to be financially set with her life before she dies and leaves Janie to fend for herself. Nanny wants her to start a f...

Contracts Cases Essay

FACTS: An Agency agreement was entered into between the Mills Company and the appellants appointing the appellants it’s Agents for a period of 30 years. The appellants throughout worked only as the Agents of the Mills Company and for the Fasli years 1351 and 1352 they received their remuneration under the terms of the Agency agreement. Notice was sent to the appellants to pay the amount of tax appertaining to these chargeable accounting periods. The appellants submitted their accounts and contended that the remuneration received by them from the Mills Company was not taxable on the ground that it is was not income, profits or gains from business and was outside the pale of the Excess Profits Tax Regulation. The Excess Profits Tax Officer made an order assessing the income of the appellants for the accounting periods 1351 and 1352 Fasli at Rs. 8,957 and Rs. 83,768 respectively and assessed the tax accordingly. ISSUES: 1. Whether under the terms of the agreement the petitioner is an employee of the Mills Company or is carrying on business? 2. Whether the remuneration received from the Mills is on account of service or is the remuneration for business? ANALYSIS OF THE FACTS: 1. The appellants were registered as a private limited company having their registered office in Bombay and the objects for which they were incorporated were the following : To act as agents for Governments or Authorities or for any bankers, manufactures merchants, shippers, Joint Stock Companies and others and carry on all kinds of agency business. 2. Under the Articles of Association of the Mills Company the appellants and their assigns were appointed the agents of the Company. The general management of the business of the Company subject to the control and supervision of the Directors, was to be in the hands of the Agents of the Company. They were to have power to appoint and employ in or for the purposes of the transaction and management of the affairs and business of the Company. The agents were authorized to sub-delegate all or any of the powers, authorities and discretions for the time being vested in them. 3. The Agency agreement which was executed provided that the appellants and their assign were to be the Agents of the Company for a period of 30 years from the date of registration of the Company and they were to continue to act as such agents until they of their own will resigned. 4. The remuneration of the appellants as such Agents was to be a commission of 2 1/2 per cent on the amount of sale proceeds of all yarn cloth and other produce of the Company. The appellants were to be paid in addition all expenses and charges actually incurred by them in connection with the business of the Company and supervision and management thereof. JUDGMENT: 1. â€Å"An agent is to be distinguished on the one hand from a servant, and on the other from an independent contractor. A servant acts under the direct control and supervision of his master, and is bound to conform to all reasonable orders given him in the course of his work; an independent contractor, on the other hand, is entirely independent of any control or interference and merely undertakes to produce a specified result, employing his own means to produce that result. An agent, though bound to exercise his authority in accordance with all lawful instructions which may be given to him from time to time by his principal, is not subject in its exercise to the direct control or supervision of the principal. An agent, as such is not a servant, but a servant is generally for some purposes his master’s implied agent, the extent of the agency depending upon the duties or position of the servant.† 2. The difference between the relations of master and servant and of principal and agent may be said to be this: a principal has the right to direct what work the agent has to do: but a master has the further right to direct how the work is to be done.† 3. In the present case, the powers did not spell a direct control and supervision of the Directors as of a master over his servant but constituted the appellants the agents of the Company who were to exercise their authority subject to the control and supervision of the Directors but were not subject in such exercise to the direct control or supervision of the principals. 4. The remuneration by way of commission of 2 1/2 per cent. of the amount of sale proceeds of the produce of the Company savoured more of the remuneration given by a principal to his agent in the carrying out of the general management of the business of the principals than of wages or salary which would not normally be on such a basis. 5. All these circumstances together with the power of sub-delegation go to establish that the appellants were the agents of the Company and not merely the servants of the Company remunerated by wages or salary. 6. The objects of the appellants in this case inter alia were to act as agents for Governments or Authorities or for any bankers, manufacturers, merchants, shippers, Joint Stock Companies and others and carry on all kinds of agency business. This object standing by itself would comprise within its ambit the activities of the appellants as the agents of the Company and constitute the work which they did by way of general management of the business of the company an agency business. Apart however from this there is the further fact that there was a continuity of operations which constituted the activities of the appellants in the general management of the Company a business. 7. All these factors taken into consideration along with the fixity of tenure, the nature of remuneration and the assignability of their rights, are sufficient to enable us to come to the conclusion that the activities of the appellants as the agents of the Company constituted a business and the remuneration which the appellants received from the Company under the terms of the Agency Agreement was income, profits or gain from business. 8. The appellants were therefore rightly assessed for excess profits tax and these appeals must stand dismissed with costs. 2. P. Krishna Bhatta And Ors. vs Mundila Ganapathi Bhatta 1955 MAD HC FACTS: The dispute in this case relates to three items of properties, viz., two parcels of land used for raising paddy and arecanut in Kedila village and a coffee estate in Coorg, ISSUES: whether in regard to these items of properties Ganapathi Bhatta was benamidar and apparent owner? (IRRELEVANT ISSUE FOR US) whether Section 66, C.P.C. applies to the transactions relating to the two items or Kedila properties, in regard to which two sale certificates have been issued in favour of Ganapathi Bhatta. The other alleged in the pleadings that Ganapathi Bhatta was an agent for the joint family of Bheernayya throughout these transactions and that therefore the prohibition under Section 66, C.P.C., would not apply to this case. Ganapathi Bhatta by no stretch of imagination can be described as the agent of Bheemayya for the purpose of buying this property in Court auction sale. PRINCIPLE: In legal phraseology, every person who acts for another is not an agent. A domestic servant renders to his master a personal service; a person may till another’s field or tend his Hocks or work in his shop or factory or mine or may be employed upon his roads or ways; one may act for another in aiding in the performance of his Legal or contractual obligations to third persons, as when he serves a public carrier, warehouse-man or innkeeper in performance of the latter’s duties to the public. In none of these capacities he is an â€Å"agent† within the above meaning as he is not acting for another in dealings with third persons. It is only when he acts as representative of the other in business negotiations, that is to say, in the creation, modification, or termination of contractual obligations between that other and the third persons, that he is an â€Å"agent.† Representation of another in business negotiations with third persons so as to bind such other by his own acts as if they were done by the former, is of the essence of the relation of agency and the distinguishing feature between art â€Å"agent† and other persons who act for another. Looked at from this point of view, an agency is a contract of employment for the purpose of bringing another-in legal relation with a third party or in other words, the contract between the principal and agent is primarily a contract of employment to bring him into legal relation with a third party Or to contract such business as may be going on between him and the third party. An agent is thus a person either actually or by law held to be authorised and employed by any person to bring hint into contractual or other legal relations with a third party. He is a representative vested with authority, real or ostensible, to create voluntary primary obligations for his principal by making promises or representations to third persons calculated induce them to change their legal relations. Representative character and derivative authority may briefly be said to be the distinguishing features of an agent. HOLDING: It is not stated in the pleadings in the present case as to when precisely Ganapathi Bhatta was constituted an agent, or on what terms he was so constituted or when the agency was got terminated or other details to spell out an agency. HE IS NOT AN AGENT. SIDE NOTE: The ‘karta’ is not the agent, or trustee of the joint family, but his position has been described as like that of a chairman of a committee 3. Loon Karan Sohan Lal vs Firm John And Co. And Ors. 1967 All HC Facts: The defendant had entered into an agreement with the defendant for the deliver of 15 bales of yarn. Since the plaintiff did not deliver on time, he went on to sue his principal, the govt. Of assam. Mr. Misra argued that the plaintiff was appointed by the Assam Government as their agent to perform the duties of procuring yarn and if in the performance of his duties as agent he suffered loss he is entitled under Sections 222 and 223 of the Contract Act to be reimbursed by the Assam Government as principal. The agreement between the plaintiff and govt. Of Assam stated: â€Å"This agreement made between the Governor of Assam represented by the Additional Secretary in th Department of Supply (Textile) hereinafter called the Govt. of the one part and M/s Loonkaran Sohanla hereinafter called the agent of the other part. The agent has been appointed for the purpose of procuring yarfor the month of August and September 1948 on the following terms and conditions.† JUDGEMET But in my opinion the description of the plaintiff in the agreement Ex. C-l and in the letter Ex. 47 as the agent of the Assam government is not conclusive. The court must examine the true nature of the agreement and the subsequent dealings between the parties, and then decide whether it established a relationship of agency under the law. It is common experience that the word ‘agent’ is frequently used to describe a relationship which is not an agency in law. an agent primarily means a person employed for the purpose of placing the principal in contractual or other relations with a third party and it is essential to an agency of this character that a third party should be in existence or contemplated. † The agreement Ex. C-l does not suggest, even by implication, that the plaintiff was to represent the Assam Government in any transaction or dealings with any other party or parties. No such parties were mentioned in the agreement or in contemplation of the signatori es to the agreement. The conduct of the plaintiff after the agreement shows that he never functioned as the agent of the Assam Government. He entered into the agreement of sale of yarn with John and Co. in his own name and on his own behalf; he paid the price from his own pocket and did not debit it to the Assam Government; he regarded himself as the owner of the goods and filed this suit in his own name. He might have been advised, when things went wrong, that the Assam Government had described him as their agent and were therefore liable to reimburse him for theloss suffered by him in the discharge of his obligations under the agreement. He is entitled to our sympathy, but he cannot in the circumstances ask this Court to make the Government liable for his losses. Mr. Misra contended that even if the plaintiff was not employed under the agreement to represent the Assam Government in dealings with third persons, he was appointed â€Å"for the purpose of procuring yarn† for the Assam Government and thus employed† to do any act for another† and this made him an agent under Section 182. I am unable to agree. There are several answers to this argument. First. it is based on a misapprehension of the words â€Å"a person employed to do an act for another† in Section 182 of the Contract Act. There is a distinction between a person employed In do an act for another and a person who does an act at the bidding if another. In the first place the act done is not that of the person employed but of him who employs him in the second, the act is that of the person himself Again, in the first case, the person employed is an agent of the employer, in the second, he merely acts at the request of another. Then again in the first case, under Section 222 the person is entitled to be indemnified against the consequences of all lawful acts done by him in the exercise of his authority as an agent, in the latter, he is entitled to be indemnified only if there is a contract of indemnity to this effect. If the plaintiff had been employed to purchase and sell cotton yarn on behalf of the Government of Assam, or asked by them to distribute yarn, belonging to the Government, he would have been their agent under Section 182 of the Contract Act and entitled to be indemnified for the consequences of all lawful acts done by him But the plaintiff, under the agreement, was to purchase yarn from others and sell it to consumers in Assam The utmost he can claim is that he entered into a transaction of sale with John & Co at the bidding of the Government of Assam. But there was no undertaking by that Government, either under the agreement exhibit C-1 or any other to indemnify the plaintiff against loss. 10. After a careful analysis of the agreement Exhibit C, I am of the opinion that it is really a license conferring upon the plaintiff the exclusive right to purchase yarn and sell it to consumers within the province of Assam. Though the plaintiff is called an agent, he was no more an agent in law than a licensee under a permit to sell intoxicating liquor subject to terms and conditions specified in the permit. Here a representative character would be required for him to be an agent which is absent. 4. Unit Trust Of India vs Ravinder Kumar Shukla The Appellant is a statutory corporation established under Section 3 of the UTI Act, 1963. As part of its activities the Appellants float various schemes. Under the various schemes from time to time, the Appellant issue cheques towards maturity amount of the units purchased and/or towards repurchase value. It appears that the Appellant normally draw Account Payee, Non-transferable and Not Negotiable cheques and send them to the payee by registered post.The Appellant started receiving a large number of complaints from unit holders alleging non-receipt of the cheques. In all 1600 unit holders had not received cheques of the value of app. Rs. 3 Crores 35 lakhs. All these cheques were intercepted, new accounts opened in Banks/Post Offices in the names of payees of the cheques and thereafter the moneis were withdrawn leaving a minimum balance in the accounts. In respect of this colossal fraud, F.I.Rs. have been lodged, investigations and prosecution are in progress. The question before this Court is whether the loss is to be borne by the unit holder payee and/or by the Appellant. The answer to this question would depend on whether the post office was acting as an agent of the unit holder and/or the Appellant. Thus the law is that in the absence of any contract or request from the payee, mere posting would not amount to payment. In cases where there is no contract or request, either express or implied, the post office would continue to act as the agent of the drawer. In that case the loss is of the drawer. (drawer here is the appellant) any proof of any contract that the amounts could be sent by post or any proof that any request had been made by any of the payees that the amount be sent by post. Mr. Bhat was also asked whether there was any proof of any practice from which it can be implied that the payee had requested/consented to have the cheques sent by post, since the prrof of such a contract could not be established. Appellant/ drawer held liable.

Financial Analysis of Sainsburys Performance - 2960 Words

Introduction J Sainsbury plc was founded in 1869 in Drury Lane by John James and Mary Ann Sainsbury, and is one of the oldest supermarkets in the United Kingdom. Its current company structure comprises of a chain of 547 supermarkets, 343 convenience stores and the recent addition of Sainsbury’s Pharmacy and Sainsbury’s Bank (which is a joint venture with the Lloyd’s bank group). Currently their customer profile consists of approximately 19 million customers’ each week and a surplus of an estimated 2,000 suppliers. Its employee structure consists of approximately 150,000 individuals and it is still expanding. The current Chief Executive Justin King believes the Sainsbury’s success and profitability can be accredited by â€Å"... our values†¦show more content†¦This is because all preferred shares converted into deferred shares and all transactions regarding to these shares have now been completed. However, as with ordinary shares, the authorized share c apital of preference shares has remained the same for the two periods. This illustrates that Sainsbury’s has the further capacity to raise revenue by issuing the preference shares at a value of 35pence, of which they currently are authorized to issue 2100 million. These have the value of  £735million. The financial reports are comparable to that of Tesco. The Annual Report shows that the authorized share capital in 2009 was 10858 million. This increased during the year to 13358 million. Between 2008 and 2009 there was a share issue of  £3milllion shares which resulted in a share premium of  £127million increase. Between 2009 and 2010,  £4million share were issued which resulted in a  £163millionincrease in share premium. These figures can be compared to that of Sainsbury’s. Between 2009 and 2010 there is a much larger increase in the amount of shares issued for Sainsbury’s than there was for Tesco. However, Tesco still resulted in a higher total share premium of 4801millionShow MoreRelatedIntroduction to J. Sainsbury Plc910 Words   |  4 Pages  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Company analysis   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Comparative analysis   Ã‚     Ã‚  Financial Ratio Analysis   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Gearing/Financial Risk   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Evaluation of Financial Analysis   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Introduction The objective of financial reporting/statements is to provide information about the reporting entity’s financial performance and financial position that is useful to a wide range of users for assessing the stewardship of the entity’s management and for making economic decisions. This is a report on the operations of J. SainsburyRead MoreSwot Analysis of Sainsbury’s Plc.1151 Words   |  5 PagesAbstract Sainsbury’s is the third largest store chain inUKand 80th placed in FTSE 100 companies with market capitalisation of  £ 5,457.35 million. The essay employs SWOT analysis to assess the strengths, opportunities, weaknesses and threats in relation to its strategy and operations in the UK and international markets with reference to its retail business. The strengths and opportunities of the company should be used to neutralise the weaknesses and to develop a competitive strategy against theRead MoreEssay on Marketing and Consumer Ethics of the Sainsbury Company1237 Words   |  5 Pagesresearched many useful websites with regards to Sainsburys. The information studied can be found in the bibliography section found at the closing part the report. According to Jobber et al (1998) the marketing mix is ` the tactical `toolkit of product, place/distribution, promotion and price that an organisation can control in order to facilitate satisfying exchange. The following is Sainsburys current marketing mix strategy. Product Sainsburys is committed to the continuous improvementRead MoreStrategic And Financial Objectives Of Sainsbury1621 Words   |  7 PagesInvestment Ratios: Sainsbury’s 2013 report states that maintaining a strong / efficient capital base will be key to fulfilling their strategic and financial objectives. This is basically the shareholder’s initial equity / monies used to buy shares in the business plus any retained earnings. The capital base is a useful a benchmark for measuring returns relative to initial outlay investment (Investopedia, 2014). Sainsbury’s manages its capital structure by buying/selling capital, issuing additionalRead MoreThe Business Environment Of Virgin Group Ltd.1366 Words   |  6 Pagestechnological factors. Task 1.1 Virgin Group Ltd. is a British multinational branded venture capital conglomerate created by entrepreneur Richard Branson. Its core business areas are travel, performing and lifestyle, and it also achieves ventures in financial facilities, transport, health care, food and drink, media and telecommunications; together, Virgin s businesses contain of more than 400 businesses worldwide. Virgin Group s date of amalgamation is listed as 1989 by Companies House, who class itRead MoreTesco Plc Financial Statements Analysis Essays5555 Words   |  23 PagesAssignment Module Financial Statement Analysis 1. Introduction to the company and its role within the wider international market; including competitors and current market conditions that may impact on its financial performance. Tesco plc is a British multinational grocery and these days the third- largest retailer worldwide in terms of revenues, operating in 14 countries across Europe, Asia and Nord America.The retailer was founded in 1919 and operated exclusively within the UK until the earlyRead MoreThe Economic Impact Of Sainsbury s Entering Its Economy1207 Words   |  5 Pagesweaknesses and strength within the Australian economy, and how this may impact Sainsbury’s entering its economy. Type of Market Australia economy is theoretically a free market based, (Discover why, 2015 and Australian online, 2007). Thus it can be perceived as a mixed market in reality like the UK because of the government interventions found in any nation. (Refer to section 3.4 for further analysis on the impacts Sainsbury’s may attain from this). GDP of Australia Australia’s GDP rates stands at 1453Read MoreEssay on Tesco vs Sainsburys Comparative Financial Analysis2039 Words   |  9 PagesIntroduction The financial report that follows sets out to analyse and compare the current financial and Market position of Sainsbury’s against Tesco. The report covers five areas of financial and market review, namely; †¢ Situation Analysis †¢ Proposed Recovery Plan †¢ Investment Appraisal of recommended Investment Projects †¢ Risk Assessment †¢ Sources of Finance Recommendations made within this report are made with the intention of increasing Sainsbury’s market share over the next 5Read MoreThe Performance Of Sainsbury And Morrison s Check Their Performance As A Food Retailers2701 Words   |  11 Pages Introduction The purpose of this report is to compare and discuss the performance of Sainsbury and Morrison’s, check their performance as a food retailers and evaluate them on CORE framework analysis. The framework comprises four stages: context, overview, ratios and evaluation together with external and internal analysis which will help evaluate and compare two retail companies. EXTERNAL CONTEXT There are 92,796 grocery stores in the UK and the market value increase by 19.5% in the last 5 yearsRead MoreFinancial Appraisal of Morrisons Company1747 Words   |  7 PagesINTERNATIONAL ACCOUNTING GROUP ASSIGNMENT FINANCIAL APPRAISAL OF MORRISONS COMPANY London, 2010 Founded in Bradford over a century ago, Morrisons Supermarkets have grown from a small shop to being the fourth biggest food retailer with stores across the UK following the acquisition of Safeway in 2006. Having achieved a market share of approximately 12%, the company’s main UK-listed competitors include Sainsbury’s, ASDA and Tesco, the latter leading the industry by