Seekinq v. iOminous, Jan 2018

Judge: TheOrangeWizard

Date: 14th January 2018

Charges

The charge is misrepresentation/unfairness in transaction. Seekinq bought 3 stacks of uncooked fish from iOminous in exchange for a “build job” which has turned out to be much larger than anticipated.

Plea

iOminous pleads not guilty.

Proceedings

• iOminous claims the terms were fully agreed on.

• Seekinq reiterates that he was expecting a build job rather than having to build a whole town.

• iOminous clarifies he did change the build he wanted Seekinq to do but asserts Seekinq owes him the work nonetheless.

• Seekinq says the fish were worth 3-5 diamonds and that the magnitude of the build job is 64-128 diamonds.

• iOminous claims he supplied the fish under urgency and that the demand and thus value of them was high. iOminous provides a picture of a large building with an onion dome on a mushrrom island that he expects Seekinq to now build (with some assistance), Seekinq refuses.

Outcome

The blame falls partially on both parties, iOminous for not providing adequate terms and on Seekinq for not confirming the terms before accepting the deal. However, as "a build" generally refers to a single building, I believe it was reasonable for Seekinq to assume it would be a single building. Therefore the court requires Seekinq to complete a single, reasonably-sized building in payment.