Search

In Australia and the UK, contracts with minors in sports and entertainment are not uncommon. Generally, such contracts are voidable at the option of the minor. However, when contracts fall within the category of beneficial service, as is the case with most professional sports or entertainment contracts, they will be enforceable against the minor. Indian courts do not prescribe to this view holding contracts with minors, void ab initio and unenforceable against contractual parties, with few exceptions. The policy rationale is embedded in protecting minors from their own rash decisions and preventing unscrupulous parties from taking advantage of a minor's nascent mental capacity. By analysing divergent approaches on the validity of minors' contracts in three common law jurisdictions—Australia, India and the UK—the authors highlight inadequacies in legal pronouncements by Indian courts. In India, the legal non-existence and unenforceability of service contracts with minors renders it futile for them or their representatives from negotiating favourable contractual terms beyond welfare measures provided by law as these are unlikely to be upheld. This paper argues that India's narrow approach fails to acknowledge practical realities of minors' participation in the increasingly commercialised sports and entertainment industry. In light of more practical approaches in other common law jurisdictions, the authors set out policy recommendations and suggest reforms to the legal position on minors' capacity to contract in India. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Forestry is interestingly situated within British imperial networks of the 19th and early 20th centuries whereby India was arguably the main node. Drawing on Lambert and Lester's concept of 'imperial careering' as a way of exploring imperial networks, this paper further extends its application to foresters as a group of middle-level technical experts as well as carrying it into the 20th century when the British Empire was by some measures at its zenith. The forestry careers of Owen Jones and Hugh Corbin, principally in Australia and New Zealand, are used to illustrate the discussion which concludes with some more general observations about imperial careerists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Britain and the Government of India embarked on the campaign in Mesopotamia for several reasons. The discovery of oil in south Persia in 1901 resulted in the formation of the Anglo-Persian Oil Company. The oil produced from this company was supplied to the Royal Navy. Germany's plan to construct a railway from Constantinople to Baghdad and Basra send tremors at London and Delhi. Germany's attempt to operate behind the facade of Turkish and Persian intrigues threatened the Anglo-Persian Oil Company's pipeline at the island of Abadan, the oilfields and the refineries. Britain was afraid that the Germans might instigate the Arab tribes to revolt. Further, capture of Basra by a hostile power would threaten Britain's sea lines of communication between Egypt and India. Logistics to a great extent had determined the texture of campaign in Mesopotamia. The logistical aspect of the Mesopotamia campaign during the Great War is yet to be studied thoroughly. The issue of supplying the British and Indian units in Mesopotamia proved crucial in shaping the course of the campaign. The first half of the paper shows how the problems of maintaining the units accelerated the disaster at Kut in April 1916. And the next section highlights the organizational restructuring of the logistical affairs which enabled the British and the Indian authorities to maintain larger number of troops with greater effectiveness from late 1916 onwards. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]