We have been working very hard since 2009 to facilitate in your learning Read More. We can't keep up without your support. Donate Now.


+ Link For Assignments, GDBs & Online Quizzes Solution


+ Link For Past Papers, Solved MCQs, Short Notes & More

Looking for Something at Site? Search Below


Contract Act

Company Background

Unilever Limited, a leading multinational company, is a fast moving consumer goods (FMCG) company that operates in different locations all across Pakistan. Initially it produced soaps and margarine produced from oil and fats. Its operations in the country continued to expand further into the food industry and also increased investment in research and development for further growth. Although, It is now one of the world's top companies, but continues to focus its portfolio, and rationalize its businesses to focus on core products and brands.

The Case

Unilever sold its oil business to M/s Dalda Foods (Pvt) Limited for Rs 250 million in 2012. Later on both the companies made an agreement of non-competition. According to the agreement, Dalda Foods restricted Unilever to compete with it in oil businesses for the period of five years. Monopoly Control Authority of Pakistan issued a show-cause notice to the Unilever Pakistan Limited and termed this agreement as a violation of monopoly laws but Unilever Pakistan ignored this order and filed an appeal in the High Court.

You are required to discuss:

  • The kind of contract took place between the Unilever Pakistan and M/s Dalda Foods (Pvt) Limited. (10)
  • The act committed by the Unilever Pakistan in reference to the Monopoly laws. (10)

please Provide Solution...


+ http://bit.ly/vucodes (Link for Assignments, GDBs & Online Quizzes Solution)

+ http://bit.ly/papersvu (Link for Past Papers, Solved MCQs, Short Notes & More)

+ Click Here to Search (Looking For something at vustudents.ning.com?)

+ Click Here To Join (Our facebook study Group)

Views: 2217

Replies to This Discussion

and what about second question

  • Ø Offer and acceptance. (in this case Unilever offers to sell the business with goodwill and Dalda Food accepts it )
  • Ø Legal relationship. (the sale deed that was made among them is legal as they agree to buy or sell a huge business)
  • Ø Legal consideration. (in this case consideration among the both parties is legal as one gets amount while other gets the company)
  • Ø Competent parties. (Both the parties are competent to the contract.)
  • Ø Free consent. (the consent among Unilever and Dalda is free from any corrosion)
  • Ø Possibility of performance. (Unilever agree to not to do business of oil in the market and Dalda is going to run the business so both the parties perform the activities with their consent)
  • Ø Terms of the agreement certain. ( the all terms of agreement are clearly described)
  • Ø Contract must be registered in writing.
  • Ø Lawful object. (the object is to sell a running business for earning some money so it is valid object)

 dont copy please 

plzz discuss about 2nd part of GDB

the contract is a void contract, because for an agreement there must be some consideration, Unilever has sold the business (that was a valid contract because a consideration of 250 million on the part of Unilever and ownership of the business of oil for Dalda was there), but now later on this contract of not competition is void, because, (the consideration here is a hindrance to a lawful business) to  give relief to  Dalda from healthy competition. as the consideration is illegal, therefore the contract is void.

second part is also under the considration RS250 million doesn't it its one contract?

 dalda put restriction on Unilever to not to compete so why Monopoly Control Authority issue a notice to Unilever not dalda?? cant understand that part

what about second question what act is commited?

1st part of agreement is indeed valid as it fulfil as the essentials but second doesnot becasue there is no considration for unilevr to but for dalda there is (non-competing) so what does it mean for whole contract?does it make it void or valid?

Q No.2 ? ACT?


read this then discuss . i am waiting.

both parties made the non compition agrement then why thier is no consideration for uniliver?

mr. salman

kion k es non-competition contact main Unilver nay apni goodwill aur business shares sale kiay hain lakin Pakistan monopoly Authority say prior permission nahin lee jaisa k monopoly act Pakistan main daraj hay.


what about Rs. 250 million?

tu kya whole contract hi void tu jaye ga.

not to compete with his employer directly or indirectly is not in restraint of trade. If it were otherwise, "all agreements for personal service for a fixed period would be void 

handout page 63 lecture 12

what about this

simple yeh hay k yeh monopoly act k against hay aur es liay void contract hay.

Question no 2??

ye tu sari discussion q no 1 pe hai



This is a member-supported website. Your contribution is greatly appreciated!

Today Top Members 

© 2020   Created by +M.Tariq Malik.   Powered by

Promote Us  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service