Factors affecting Key Skills Achievements in Further Education Essay

Factors affecting Key Skills Achievements in Further Education - Essay Example During the last years the attention is paid to the key skills development though they are not considered to be popular. Indeed, it was pressure from employers that resulted in the Key Skills standards being revised in QCA’s Phase 1 Report, and recommendations were made in September 2001. The research showed that sometimes the Key Skills are even more effective than the professional ones. That is the reason for Key Skills to be an integral part of the educational programmes. There are some different views as to â€Å"key† skills, but The Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA) has stated some number of skills which are considered to be â€Å"key†. These are such skills as: problem solving (defining the problems, choosing the alternative solutions to the problem, planning the actions to be taken). The most important of them are: communication, application of number, and information technology. Nowadays a great attention is paid to such a notion as â€Å"functional illiteracy†. But this notion should not be confused with the notion of ignorance. In today’s changing environment employers are demanding different skills from their employees. The Moser Report: A Fresh Start, improving Literacy and Numeracy (1999), opened with the statement: ‘Something like one in five adults in this country is not functionally literate and far more have problems with numeracy and one of the reasons for relatively low productivity in our economy’. This suggests that individuals do not have the functional skills and may be the reason why QCA’s current project may result in a name change from Key Skills to ‘Functional Skills’ According to Alexander Alexander’s (1999 p117) the statistics of the U.N.O. shows that 99 per cent of citizens of the USA, Germany, Great Britain and other European countries are literate people. The problem of functional

The Normandy landings in Defeating Germany in World War Two Essay Example for Free

The Normandy landings in Defeating Germany in World War Two Essay 1. Using source A and your own knowledge explain why the D-day was such an important event of World War two? D-Day was such an important event of World War Two for numerous amounts of reasons. The term D-Day actually means The Day. As said by Major Elson, it is the day where everyone does something. Major Elson fought on the Italian front, which is demonstrated on the map. D-Day was to be June 1944 minutes between night turning to morning on the 6th. The Germans had occupied France and France needed Britain, Canada and America to come together to regain the French territory for them. As well as this, Russia was fighting of Germany in the East and needed the Allies to relieve pressure. D-Day was a very important part into ending the war but other factors include the Battle of the Atlantic, the fighting in North Africa and the Battle of Britain. Arriving at Normandy using the Mulberry harbours, the Allies captured all of the five designated beaches (Omaha, Juno, Gold, Sword and Utah) despite strong German coastal defences. This is mainly due to the opposing armies having no idea to where the Allied forces would be landing because no place in France were called those names. The map shows where the troops entered France and this also clearly enforces the sheer scale of the invasion and its importance into keeping it top secret. Meanwhile, parachutists were flown in nearly 20 minutes after mid-night to capture Pegasus Bridge on the River Orne and Vier. This was important as it prevented German counter attacks from transporting troops to the beaches. As quick as they could, the Americans advanced all the way up to Cherbourg and captured it. Meanwhile, the British struggled pushing through Norman hedgerows which proved excellent cover for the defending German formations but the Allies succeeded in liberating the city of Caen in the end. This then led to the captivity of the capital of Normandy, Flank Con. However, with the capture of Saint-Là ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½ and later Avranches in mid-July, the way was open for an Allied breakout into open country, an opportunity seized by General Omar Bradley, commander of the 12th US Army Group, who early in August ordered his forces to advance to the east. Hitler refused to allow the Wehrmacht to abandon Normandy and ordered a German armoured counter-attack against the allied forces near Avranches. On August 7 the German offensive was defeated and they soon found themselves in a trap as Canadian and United States divisions began to close in on both sides. On August 19th the allied forces had closed the gap at Falaise, trapping about 12 German divisions, who were subjected to merciless air and artillery bombardment. Hitler now ordered his forces in the gap to escape: about 30,000 did so, while 50,000 were captured by the Allies. The Germans were forced back by sheer weight of numbers by the Allies and by August 25th 1944 Paris had been liberated. After this, the Allies advanced too far, too fast to the border of France and Germany and so the Germans were able to push back one area of the line of troops, enforcing a bulge. This was known as The Battle of the Bulge. The Allies overcome this. The Allied advance in the west and south through Italy coupled with the Soviet advance in the east led to the overall defeat of Germany on May 7th 1945 11 months after D-Day began. The map demonstrates all of the above happenings and the names of the commanders in charge show their line of advancement into Germany. This map also, clearly shows us just how much land had been covered and that the Allies werent just invading from Normandy but from the Mediterranean, from the east (USSR) and from Italy. However, if it werent for the declaration of operation Overlord at Normandy then it is possible to say that attacks elsewhere would not have taken place. The map helps me explain my theory; you can see an awful lot of troops coming from all directions heading towards Germany but the majority are advancing from Britain. Thus meaning that without the attack from Normandy, it wouldnt relieve pressure from the eastern front with USSR and in general, the Allies wouldnt have won the Battle of Normandy. A key factor is that the Battle of Normandy was the beginning of the end. It was a turning point in the war and I can make a judgement from my evidence that the Battle of Normandy was a key factor into the defeat of Germany (Victory in Europe) and possibly to ending the war altogether. 2. Study sources B and C. Compare these judgements on the importance of D-Day in the outcome of the Second World War. From studying both sources, I can see that they differ considerably. Both sources say the importance of D-day. Source C tells the problem of getting over the river Rhine and the vigorous German counter attacks. Source B doesnt have a particular author but it was written for the Telegraph Newspaper marking the 50th anniversary to commemorate D-Day. There are two key facts to touch upon in this subject area. Firstly, I have recognised that this is a British newspaper and therefore its information would be from a British perspective. By this, I mean that it will say only what the British public wants to hear especially on the anniversary. The anniversary is a celebration of freedom and victory and commemoration so for a British newspaper, the British public is not going to want to hear about D-Days flaws. Secondly, this is secondary evidence. This means the writer wasnt there to actually see what happened- he/she is just going on the basis of what they have heard and researched. However, this is the same for source C so there is no difference in that respect. Regardless, a British historian (Jack Watson) writes source C. Therefore, this man is obviously bound to know his stuff as his career is based around the acknowledgement of history. Thus meaning that he isnt just purely writing to commemorate the anniversary of D-Day, he is writing it because he is interested in it. Maybe this is why source C is far much more detailed than source B. From reading source B, it had become clear to me that the way in which the text had been written; it comes across although D-Day was achieved in such little time. This is true but the advancement of the troops from Normandy to Paris did come with a bit of a struggle at some areas (e.g. British troops capturing Caen) and so it wasnt as straightforward as the writer is making out. I think the writer has done this to give the British public what they want to hear and therefore will sell more copies. Another possibility is that the writer just needed to summarise D-Day and just produce an overview. Source C explains that it wasnt just down to Normandy that D-Day took place. Watson says how paratroopers landed in Holland, resistance broken in Italy and fighting in Germany. This means the historian has studied a broader area to the happenings of D-day rather then just focusing on France like source B. I think this is because people, who read his writings, are going to be more inclined to see D-Day from all angles of perspective. I believe people reading Watsons work would like a less judgmental and less biased view to the events of D-Day. Source B illustrates a bit more on how important Normandy was and how we commemorate it today. I do think that the writer of source B is somewhat biased and possibly holding back factual information which would probably give us a different perspective on D-Day as he has just wrote it to please, however, this leaves this piece of evidence to some extent, being unreliable. Source C, nevertheless, has more factual evidence and includes as much information about D-Day in as little words as possible for it to be a more reliable source. It takes into account the German resistance and understands the Allies didnt gain liberation easily. 3. Study sources D and E. Use details from the cartoons and your wider knowledge in your answer. What do these cartoons suggest about the reasons why the allies defeated Germany? There are many reasons as to why the allies defeated Germany. Source D illustrates one aspect. Source D shows Adolf Hitler ordering troops to invade the USSR but they turn into graves instead. From my own knowledge I know that this occurred on June 22nd 1942. Hitler envisioned it as short decisive war with USSR reaching a spectacular triumph. It started well for the German army who successfully employed the blitzkrieg tactic again. The Germans had a spectacular rate of progress into the USSR with the Panzer tank regiments moving up to twenty miles a day. By September1941 the German army had reached the Ukraine farmlands and had surrounded the city of Leningrad. This was the height of German success from this point onwards the German defeat became more and more probable. The German forces were unprepared for the extreme Russian winter with temperatures reaching as low as -40 degrees Celsius. The Russians used a huge evacuation policy, which involved evacuating whole armaments factories to the east of the USSR. This ensured that even though they had lost a large amount of territory they still had the means with which to fight back. USSR was well organised because at the time of signing the Nazi-Soviet Pact, they realised they couldnt possibly fight a war as they werent ready. Therefore, this treaty gave USSR time to prepare, and so they did. Consequently, this Soviet cartoon depicts basically how Hitler sent his troops to death. As well as defeats in the east, there are other areas in which Germany fell. Between the years of 1939 and 1941 the United States of America had played a supposedly neutral role in the war. While not actually declaring war on the Germans the USA was supplying the British with everything they needed to keep the war effort going. The American role in the war changed on the 7th December 1941 when the Japanese attacked the American naval base at Pearl Harbour in Hawaii. The American President Roosevelt used this attack to swing public opinion in favour of declaration of war. The USA declared war on Japan and three days later Hitlers Germany declared war on the USA. This declaration of war by Germany was a decisive point in the whole war. It has long been wondered why Hitler chose to declare war on the Americans. His forces were just suffering their first defeats in the USSR and the German army was already stretched on a number of different fronts. This clearly shows that the Germans were failing before they had begun. I believe this relates to the cartoon; the troops in the picture are defeated before they have even begun. As if Germany hadnt enough on their hands and hadnt taken into account the loss of men in the cold winter months in Russia, they continued and they reached the key industrial and railway centre of Stalingrad in August 1942. A bitter street battle ensued which continued until February 1943. Eventually the Germans were defeated in the Battle of Stalingrad one of the fiercest battles in the whole war. The Russian victory destroyed the invincible reputation of the German army. The defeat also destroyed the German morale because of the large losses of men and because of the fact that the supposed master race had been defeated by a lower race in the Slavs. This obviously didnt give the Germans the courage to go on. Not to mention, an awful lot of the German army was foreign so they wasnt as eager to fight as its not their country they are defending. Germany was a country practically on its own. Whereas on the other side there was Canadians, Russian, American and British all fighting on the same team with a greater number of troops. The Atlantic Ocean was a key battleground in the Second World War because of the large number of allied supplies travelling from the USA to Britain and the USSR. The Germans had had control of the Atlantic since the beginning of the war with the number of U-boats losses being very minimal compared to the number of Allied shipping lost. But by mid 1943 technological advances allowed the Allies to effectively win the Battle of the Atlantic. Some of these advances included better radar detection systems and longer-range aircraft. The victory in the Atlantic meant that Britain was no longer blockaded. The Germans also lost the war in the air. Over a period of two years between 1942 and 1944 the Allies mounted ever more devastating air attacks on German cites. The Allies were able to drop a far greater tonnage of bombs over German cites than the Luftwaffe could drop over British cites because of the development of a heavy bomber by the allies. The continuing air attacks slowly gained the Allies complete air superiority which was key for the D-Day landings in June 1944. These are all the events that lead up to June 6th (D-Day) and all of these links in with the effect of D-Day. In conclusion it could be argued that there were a number of different turning points in the war. On the one hand, the declaration of war by the USA, the Soviet victory in Stalingrad the Allies successful completion of Operation Overlord or when Hitler choose to declare war on the USA, could all be considered as the turning points in the war. Overall we believe that the point at which German defeat became inevitable was when Churchill and several great generals including Eisenhower and Montgomery planned the daring invasion of Normandy and put it into action. Sources D and E demonstrate this quite clearly. Source E basically shows that Stalin and a Russian soldier/general could easily roll over the Germans without much of a fuss and were defeating them generously. Germany, as illustrated above, suffered many defeats and Normandy just basically hit the nail on the head. The French were Allies with Britain and Britain was Allies with USSR and Canada and USA. I dont suppose it benefited the Axis in any way at all with the economic and industrial power of the Allies was now overwhelming. If the Germans had been fighting the British alone the war would have been one of attrition like the First World War because Britain and Germanys industrial output were equal. So with the addition of the two most industrial powers in the world in the form of the USA and the USSR the Allies could not lose. All of the previous defeats like the fighting in North Africa, the Battle of Britain, the Battle of the Atlantic and the fighting in the East with USSR etc. are all linked with the effect of the Battle of Normandy. On the other hand, in my opinion, if it wasnt actually for the Battle of Normandy which led to the liberation of France and the Falaise gap and so on, then Germany would of carried on capturing countries until the end. It is also possible to say that if Germany hadnt declared war on USA (for which reason we do not know) then USA might have still stayed out of the war against Germany (and only fought Japan) and also, Germany might have stood a chance of winning. But they still would have had a war on two fronts with USSR, too. Therefore, if they hadnt declared war on USSR in 1942 then they would have had more troops to give resistance on D-Day. In general, Germany didnt stand a chance as the British were sending messages to the French resistance who helped prepare for D-Day and also the British bombed Calais four times as much as they did Normandy to give Hitler the impression they were invading at Calais rather than Normandy. Therefore, Hitler sent more troops to defend Calais and this was completely unnecessary. This then meant, that on the attacks of Normandy, Hitler was unable to send troops to Normandy from Calais because the paratroopers had captured the bridges and railway lines etc. D-day was the largest invasion to be known as of yet and the Germans couldnt retaliate against 3 countries including 176,000 allied soldiers, alone-not to mention the attacks from the East. 4. Study source F. How reliable is Stalins view of the importance of D-Day? Source F may only say that one thing has been completed successfully and that is the landings on a grandiose scale. We can infer from the rest of what Stalin says that the beach landings are going quite successful as well, because he says that. I think this is a fairly trustworthy source in that Jopeph Stalin was the leader of USSR at that time. This is primary evidence and was sent only five days after the landings so the goings on was still perfectly clear in Stalins mind. Also the date is reliable because this could not have been said before D-Day as the things Stalin mentions hadnt happened yet. Also he is speaking in the present tense so it is obvious that what he is talking about is currently going on. There are several things that it does not say in the text, perhaps because Stalin does not know this, or perhaps he is holding back. He does not tell us anything about what the opposition is doing or what the planes and ships providing covering fire are doing, which could be very useful information. The bottom part of the text in bold allows us to infer several things. It tells us he is speaking personally via telegram to Churchill, from this we can infer that as he is writing in the form of a telegram he may not want to mention a few things. He obviously will not criticise Churchills operation, as they are allies. Russia needed Britain, USA and Canada to relive pressure from the east and for Stalin to be congratulating Churchill on the success of it must mean that D-Day had relieved pressure and so Stalins telegram is of some great significance and importance. At face value it is impossible to judge the importance of the D-Day landings from just studying Source F alone. Inconclusively, by making careful inferences we can think that it was obviously a great success, for Stalin to send a telegram to Churchill congratulating him and saying history will record this deed as an achievement of the highest order. It is very difficult to analyse any resistance from the Germans from this source and whether USSR had any part in D-Day or whether D-Day was purely to do with anything else like the fighting in Italy. I know, however, that there was from my own knowledge but this source doesnt imply anything of the kind-5 days into the D-Day landings and Stalin is congratulating him already, before they have really begun. So in that sense, Stalins view isnt that reliable in the importance of D-day. On the other hand, Stalin wrote it so it has to be reliable-it is first hand evidence. He was there to witness the goings on at the time you cant get much closer to it than that and he shows his support to Churchill. Although Russia signed the Nazi-Soviet Pact with Germany, it was under a mutual understanding and this didnt make them Allies, it merely kept the peace for a little while. So there would be no reason for this source not to be unreliable as they were Allies. Stalin also proves from the Pact that he wasnt at all with Germany because he says the hysterical Hitler boasted for two years that he would invade England across the channel but could not even make up his mind even to attempt carrying out the threat. This means one of a few things. Firstly, Stalin stitched up Hitler to Churchill about Hitlers threat to invade England. Secondly, he criticises him, calling him hysterical. This clearly states he was never a German ally, he just used the Nazi-Soviet Pact as much as Hitler did. Stalin was Allies with Churchill and Churchill was the prominent figure who arranged D-Day. Therefore, his evidence has to be somewhat reliable and relevant to the importance of D-Day. 5. Study sources G and H. Which of these sources is more useful as evidence in assessing the significance of D-Day? On the one hand, Source H is obviously written by one of the allies rather than Germany, as it does not say as such. I know this because the way in which Geoffrey Elliot refers to the event is on a positive note. If a German wrote it, I would expect it to be somewhat negative as a pose to praising the significance of D-Day. Additionally, another factor as to why source H is useful to the significance of D-Day is that it recognises the obstacles the Allies faced. This is because most sources that are written by a member of the Allies country normally exclude the difficulties they faced and just note how greatly they succeeded. Members of the Axis countries usually criticise D-Day and find faults on every account in its events. Therefore, this source, in that sense, is exceedingly reliable as it looks at both perspectives. From my own knowledge, this is to some extent unusual. It states that a change in weather could have destroyed. Meaning that the weather made it harder for the allies to get on the beaches and off load their equipment. Despite this, they did it even though they were forced to cancel out the Mulberry Harbour at Omaha beach due to the weather. On the other hand, source G was written by a historian and it is obvious that he is bound to know the significance of D-Day thoroughly. The writing in bold at the bottom reads that Taylor has studied English history from 1914-1945. This means that he has studied both of the wars (First World War and the Second World War) and knows all knowledge he can on the subject. He would be able to see how significant D-Day was out of the Second World War in greater detail even if it secondary evidence rather than primary. Furthermore, Source G is less biased on the count that it involves the aid of Russia and America. This is great considering other evidence written by British historians, that I have studied seems to out-rule the Russian help and sometimes fails to mention about the Canadians and Americans. Conjointly, this source looks at the events leading up to D-Day and not just D-Day itself. For example, it says that Dunkirk was the period when Britain stood alone. This signifies one of two things. Firstly, Taylor is not just looking at the successes, as being alone isnt much of a success. Secondly, Dunkirk isnt part of D-Day. This can be seen as a good or a bad thing. Bad, because he isnt focusing himself on D-Day and this is what is required for me in order to assess the usefulness of this source to the significance of D-Day. Good, because he is analysing other factors into the vents leading up to Normandy and other factors that helped the invasion succeed. Source G also gives more precise key names and dates throughout the text. This relevant because this shows the historian knows what he is writing about. To add to this, I know for a fact that it is written by a British person because it says so at the bottom in bold. However, this is can mean that the historian is more inclined to be biased but being a British historian, it is expected. Taylor doesnt look at D-Day from a German prospective, given that it was published 20 years after the war. Instead, it sees D-Day as a final victory. They may be his opinion, but it was nearly a year after D-Day that the Germans surrendered so it wasnt exactly a final victory. To analyse exactly what source is more useful than the other to the significance of D-Day I must study their flaws. Source H appears to be more of an overview than anything else. This is satisfactory if its just for the 50th anniversary but compared with source G, with a lot more detail than itself, it is not good. This brings me on to the fact that it is a commemorative article produced for a magazine on the 50th anniversary. An editor who briefly researched the events of D-day produced this article and probably doesnt particularly focus on this subject matter. This is my interpretation of what I thought after reading the text. But as a pose to source G, which is written by a historian whose job and interest is to research the wars thoroughly, it doesnt compare. Therefore, in my opinion, I personally feel that Source G is more useful to the significance of D-Day and the evidence above backs up my theory as a whole. 6. Why do you think sources I and J disagree about the defeat of Germany and the end of World War Two? When one looks at sources I and J, we can see they are very different when juxtaposed with all the other sources and different compared with themselves. The only point at where they have something in common is that both sources are secondary evidence. Source I is written by Yves Leccouturier who is from Normandy. I know this because it says so in bold at the bottom of the source. The fact that he is from Normandy is a great factor to his perspective of the attack itself. He isnt going to be bitter about the landings as the allies came to liberate France, not invade it. Therefore, he is, of course, going to be grateful towards the Allies for pushing the Germans out of France. There is additional evidence that backs up my theory behind this. He describes it as the liberation of Europe and in the outcome of the Second World War. This clearly indicates just how grateful he is and that the rest of Europe should be grateful, too as the Allies savoured them and without them, V E Day wouldnt have been achieved (Victory in Europe-of, which I believe Leccouturier is referring to). Leccouturier also believes that as a result of the landings at Normandy, the war ended (illustrates this in the quote). Both of these examples, would be key factors as to why the source was written in this manner. Another quotation in the text to back up my theory is when Leccouturier says Everyone welcomed the liberator with limitless enthusiasm. Leccouturier is also a French Historian. This helps to establish his reasons behind the source because he would know a great deal about the landings from living there and also from being a historian. He would have surely researched a great deal into the subject matter. To add to this, he is writing this source for a guidebook of the Normandy beaches for tourists. In essence, the type of tourists that are likely to visit this area of France would essentially be French, British, American and Canadian. These are the countries that were on the same side as each other and so it would be me probable for them to visit Normandy as a pose to a German citizen. Therefore, it is logical for this source to be biased, in that approach and this is another instance as to why the source is written in this form. Source J has an immensely different view on the topic. Source J is written by a Soviet historian some years after (1968) and feels very differently juxtaposed with Source I. Source J, from studying the text, appears to be bitter about the Allied troops receiving all the credit for the result and the war ending as a result of that. Source J basically writes it in this way because they dont feel recognised enough by western Allies for their efforts in the war. The Russians were the ones who requested back up from Britain and Churchill took up the request along with America and Canada. Therefore, I can see why credit goes to the Western Allies as they were the saviours but it was Russia who was fighting of German in the East in the first place. The Soviets feel forgotten it seems, from the way the source appears, that Russians just want some sort of recognition for their efforts in the outcome. In conclusion, all of the evidence above makes it clear to why the sources disagree to the defeat of Germany and the end of the Second World War. This is because the Soviet historian wring this text feels that USSR played a key part up to, on and after D-Day and that they havent received a sign of gratefulness or not enough of it from the western Allies they helped. Juxtaposed with source I, who boasts about how joyous the Normans were when the Allies landed and how the Normans welcomed the liberators with limitless enthusiasm. And liberators being the word. It doesnt mention a word about USSR and their efforts and this source is just another example as to why source I disagrees with the defeat of Germany and the end of the Second World War. Being from Normandy and writing for a Norman guide book, it isnt likely that he is going to mention the USSR as they didnt land here, they didnt capture the beaches, Caen, Cherbourg or Paris, they werent anything to do with the Battle of Normandy itself. They were involved with the fighting in the east while the liberators fought in the west. France praised the Western Allies and the Soviets got jealous. All these reasons conclude, in my opinion, to why the sources disagree about the defeat of Germany and the outcome of the Second World War. 7. How far have the sources in this paper convinced you that D-Day and the Normandy invasion was the most significant factor in the defeat of Germany in World War Two? Use all the sources and your wider knowledge There are numerous sources that reflect that Normandy was the most significant factor in the defeat of Germany in World War Two and sources A, B, C, F, G, H and I are included. On the one hand, Normandy was by far, the largest and most amphibious invasion that has ever been planned, let alone to have succeeded. Source A depicts how much of a large-scale invasion it was because you can see a tremendous amount of troops came in from the English Channel to Normandy at the five beaches. Source B, written for the Telegraph newspaper for 50th anniversary edition, classifies it as the turning point in the Second World War and the greatest amphibious operation the world has ever seen. This is the second source to illustrate how much of significant factor the Normandy landings played to the defeat of Germany and the Second World War. Source C, written by a British historian, delivers another quotation to put to my evidence by writing the Germans were driven back. This directly explains that the landings at Normandy advanced to this. I also have primary evidence from Stalin, the leader of Russia. Stalin says, from his first hand knowledge that the landings have succeeded completely. What the Western Allies wanted to do was liberate France, force the Germans out of France and relieve pressure from Russia. Obviously, for Stalin to send this message in a telegram to Churchill after just five days, it must have been working. Source G, written by a British historian, explains that combined with the Russians, British and American armies brought final victory. Thus meaning that D-Day achieved its targets of relieving pressure on Russia, liberating France and more importantly, defeating Germany bringing Victory in Europe (V E Day). Another commemorative magazine on the 50th anniversary, source H, though it is a small article, provides a lot of evidence. To begin with, it refers to the D-Day and the Normandy invasion was a military feat. This infers that D-Day and the Normandy invasion was an achievement for the Allies. This source also says that D-Day and the Normandy invasions were a plan to smash German power in Europe. I can say from this that not only was it a plan; it was a plan put into action. Finally, source I, written by a French historian from Normandy wring tourist guidebook, says how the French coastline is marked forever by the first steps towards the liberation of Europe. By this remark, I assume he is referring to V E Day (Victory in Europe Day). In which case, this source directly shows that D-day and the invasion of Normandy was significant into the defeat of Germany. On the other hand, whilst D-Day and the Normandy invasion is obviously a prominent factor to the defeat of Germany, there are other factors, too. Source A shows how many troops came via the Channel but it also shows how Allied troops came from Italy, all along the German border of Russia and from the Mediterranean and into France. This demonstrates that Germany wasnt just being attacked from Normandy. Source D depicts a cartoon of Hitler ordering troops to invade USSR but instead, they turn into graves. This cartoon clearly states that there was fighting on the eastern front with Russia and that Germany wasnt benefiting from it and arent just suffering defeats in the West. Source E backs that up as it demonstrates Stalin rolling Germans back using a rolling pin and in the stew pots behind him are defeats Germany had already suffered from USSR. It is ironic that the cartoon is named The Chefs Speciality as this means the Russian speciality is to roll Germans back and defeat them. Source G has two sides to it. It does say that the Normandy invasions and D-Day brought final victory but it also says that D-Day couldnt have been launched until German U-boats have been mastered in the summer of 1943. The reason for this is because the Navy wanted absolute air and sea superiority before they proceed with the invasion. This led to an attack on the Atlantic Ocean named Battle of the Atlantic. Therefore, without the Battle of the Atlantic, D-Day and the Normandy invasion couldnt take place. Source J expresses how it wasnt just down to D-Day and the Normandy invasions that Germany was defeated. Source J, written by a Soviet, believes the Soviets played a role in defeating the Nazi aggressor but has not been fully recognised by the Western Allies. It continues to add that it was the Soviet people who held back the Nazis in Europe for over two years while the Western Allies deliberated and prepared for their invasion. I gather from this text that point this source is trying to get across is that without the Soviets aid, Hitler would of put into action his plans of invading Britain (as said by Stalin, Source F). Britain would have been unprepared and the invasion of Normandy and D-Day wouldnt have taken place at all. There are factors not included in any of the sources that without their aid, D-Day and the Normandy invasion wouldnt have been as significant as it was. The Battle of Britain is one of them. Germany was bombing RAF bases in Britain every night for 53 nights before bombing cities. This was a fatal mistake. It gave the RAF time to regroup, repair airfields and train new pilots. Therefore, Germany lost along with a few other reasons. But if Germany had won, Germany would have gained supremacy in the air and Germany would have invaded Britain and probably lost the war as a whole. Dunkirk was a key element in boosting the British moral and saving 50,000 troops from the coast of France. This is a great feat because if the British public didnt rescue them then the British troops would have been stuck at Dunkirk and captured by the Germans. They were saved and this meant that Britain still had its troops and could progress onwards. The loss of 50,000 men would have had an effect on their efforts with D-Day and the invasion of Normandy. The fighting on the Italian front and North Africa played an important role into the significance D-Day and the invasion of Normandy had to the defeat of Germany. This is for the same reasons as the fighting on the eastern front with Russia and the Germans in that if the British had lost this, Germans would have been able to progress onwards through France and would have possibly been more ready for the invasion of Normandy and D-Day. To add to this, Germany was failing anyway, mainly as a result of all these defeats above. Germany had fewer troops and wasnt as well prepared as the Allies. The Allies had paratroopers fly in to capture main railway lines and bridges to prevent Germans from bringing in reinforcements. There were also preparations in Britain. Britain had inflatable military equipment, code signals were sent to the French resistance, petrol pumps for military vehicles in Normandy were disguised as ice-cream parlours and they dropped Rupert dolls which were counterfeit paratroopers that fired gun shot sounds when they landed. Furthermore, Britain sent a van around Scotland sending out more false alerts of an invasion from Scotland and they bombed Calias 3-4 times more than Normandy so the Germans would think an attack would be in Calias. They also invented special tanks to overcome German obstacles, they used reflective stripes to confuse German radar systems and they code-named the beaches so the Germans didnt know where they were going to attack. This is a drastic amount of preparations to undergo but these kinds of preparations meant that Germany didnt, in theory, stand a chance of winning. I dont think Churchill would have organised such a large-scale invasion, involving 4 main countries if he wasnt assured of a beneficial outcome. I think most of the significance of D-Day and the invasion of Normandy was, on the whole, down to exceedingly good planning and a lot of luck. However, the sources, overall, in this paper and from my own knowledge, have convinced me that D-Day and the invasion of Normandy are the most significant factors to the defeat of Germany in the Second World War. The Invasion of Normandy led to a lot of things. For instance the capture of Cherbourg, Caen and Paris. The Falaise Gap was a great achievement as it captured 50,000 German troops and from then the Allies progressed fast to the French-German border where the Battle of the Bulge took place. The Allies won this two and then it was just a race with Russia to get to Berlin. Of course there were set backs, like the weather, the struggle at Caen and the capture of Omaha beach, but thats expected in a large-scale invasion as this. But on the whole, there were a lot of achievements and the invasion accomplished their targets and the invasion was a success. Germany surrendered on the 5th May 1945 and there was victory in Europe at last. Without all the other factors that led up to D-Day and the luck involved, Normandy wouldnt have either taken place, succeeded or succeeded as well as it did.

Design and Simulation of Automatic Load Tap Changer

Design and Simulation of Automatic Load Tap Changer   Introduction CE 3.1 This is the third project I did as a graduate Electrical Engineering while pursuing my Bachelor of Engineering in the field of Electrical Engineering from Balochistan University of Engineering and Technology, Balochistan, Pakistan. I wanted to conduct a project that would enable the transformer to attain different voltage levels using a load tap changing transformer and thus wanted to learn about different electrical/electronic components that would be needed and thus learn about its design and how to implement it. I was able to improve my written and oral presentation skills as well as my interpersonal skills by the successful completion of this project. Background CE 3.2 For my third project as an undergraduate in electrical engineering, I wanted to start working on a project during my second year. I wanted to learn about the different and commonly used electrical/electronic components, the working mechanism and the implementation in complex projects. This served as a motivation to conduct a project on Load Tap changers. I had studied during my bachelors that Transformer Load changers are an integral part to any power grid whether in big projects or small. I knew that there were the Mechanical Load tap changer and the Electronic Load Tap Changer. I wanted to design an automatic Electronic type Load tap changer to the problems with reliability and maintenance of the Mechanical type.Also, I learned that by using Thyristors to take the on-load current while the main contacts change over from one tap to the next, the design would have no moving parts and thus have a longer service life. And it is due to this reason that I selected the Design of Automatic Load Tap Changer for my project. CE 3.3 The objective of this project is to design and build a prototype of a fully electronic on load tap changer for power transformers by using Triacs as switching devices and microcontroller as the triggering circuit. CE 3.4 CE 3.5 I successfully completed this project by engaging in the following activities: I divided my project into Power circuitry and Control circuitry. I designed the power circuitry to basically consist of a tapping transformer connected to the load through the switching devices. I designed the Control circuitry to sense the voltage signal fed from the step down transformer and compare it to a pre-set reference value. I used a Triac which is a three terminal semiconductor for controlling the current in both directions. I used a Power Circuit, Microcontroller Unit, Analog To Digital Converter, Zero Crossing Detector, Multiplexer, LCD, Buzzer as the parts of the circuit I completed the project within the time frame specified by the university. I conducted detailed literature review on all the components used here. Personal Engineering Activity CE 3.6 I approached a professor with an idea of conducting a project with transformers. Along with my team mate, I had a lot of brainstorming sessions and review meetings with my project supervisor to select a suitable topic. I suggested that I work on a project that was concerned with designing and fabricating a system based on Automatic Electronic Load Tap Changer of a Transformer and the supervisor agreed to this and asked us to begin working on this by first conducting a literature review on all the components we would require and the working of this project and to start working on this project. CE 3.7 I first started with the design of the Power circuitry which consists of our main Tapping Transformer. The tapping is provided at 231V, 225V, 220V, 214V, 209V and 0V. Furthermore, I decided to incorporate BTA16 Triacs. I also decided to build a snubber circuit using 100ÃŽÂ © resistor and a 104pF capacitor. I decided to use the Triac instead of the SCR because a triac operates in the same way as the SCR however it operates in both forward and reverse directions. Also, I had to ensure the TRIAC will turn off correctly at the end of each half-cycle of the AC power. And due to this reason I used the snubber circuit to assist in the turning off and on. I used a MOC 3021 to assist with this. Circuitry Diagram The following are the components I used for this project: I used the AT80S8252 Microcontroller or the 89C52 which is a high performance CMOS 8bit microcomputer of sorts. ADC 0804 Analog to Digital Controller which feeds the input to the microcontroller. I used a step down transformer to provide samples to the ADC of the load.-   Zero Crossing Detector to provide the required pulses for the AND logic along with the multiplexer. A Multiplexer or Mux is a device that selects one of several analog or digital input signals and forwards the selected input into a single line.In my project, the Interlocking mechanism is achieved by using Multiplexer. Thus, at any instant of time, no two triacs would be in their ON STATE. This is particularly important and advantageous in case the logic of microcontroller fails. I used a Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) to display the output voltage that would be across the load side. I used an Optocoupler MOC 3021 to transfer signals between different elements of a circuit. CE 3.8 The following is the manner of the working of this project using a block diagram: The block diagram shows the basic strategy, as to how the Load Tap Changer will work automatically. I used TRIACs as the switching devices. I made sure that the The transformer has five tappings at the voltage level. Each of these tappings is connected to the one of the main terminals of the TIRAC. The second main terminals of all the five TRIACS have been shorted. So at any given time when any of the TRIAC has been switched on there is only one conducting path to the load. I used a step down transformer to step down the voltage level to instrumentation levels so that it can be used in the control circuitry. As the voltage increases or decreases depending on the nature of the load the voltage at the primary of the step down transformer varies, resulting in an equivalent variation at the secondary side. I then had to make sure that this sampled AC voltage is rectified to an almost smooth DC value. This DC voltage is then fed to the analog to digital converter, which gives a digital output that can be understood by the microcontroller. The ADC output is fed to the microcontroller which had been already programmed to compare this incoming value to a set of predefined values and send a high signal on one of its port bits. The output of the microcontroller is fed to a multiplexer. It is incorporated to ensure that at any given time, even if the logic fails there is only 1 conduction path to the load. I.e. only one TRIAC is switched on at any instance in time. I also used the zero crossing detector in order to detect the instance when the AC voltage crosses the zero amplitude mark. The output of this zero crossing detector is in the form a pulse generated every half cycle. I then fed the output of the zero crossing detector and the multiplexer to the AND logic as shown in the diagram. Each time the zero crossing detector gives an output, a pulse is generated at the output of the AND logic This output of the AND logic is basically our trigger signal for the switching devices i.e. the TRIACs however in order to isolate the control and high voltage circuitry and to implement DC triggering on the TRIACs operating at AC voltages the Optocouplers have been incorporated. So basically the Optocouplers are only there to provide isolation. CE 3.9 The following are simulation results I obtained: When input is 220v, the Triac on Tap 3 is on. When the input is 225v, the Triac on Tap 2 is on. Summary CE 3.10   Ã‚   I successfully completed the project titled Design and Simulation of Automatic Load Tap Changer along with my team mate. I learned how to build a circuit board and how all the different electrical components talk to each other in this project. I learned how important the Load Tap Changer is for any power grid and how useful it is over the Mechanical type Load type changer. By successfully completing this project, I was able to improve my written, oral and interpersonal skills.

Eliyahu M. Goldratts The Goal Essay -- Goldratt

The Goal Here are the principles behind the dramatic turnaround story in The Goal. The goal of a manufacturing organization is to make money. Jonah poses this as a question: "What is the goal?" and Rogo actually struggles with it for a day or two, but any manager or executive that can't answer that question without hesitation should be fired without hesitation. But then again, the goal isn't clear to everyone. One of the characters in the book, an accountant, responds to an offhand comment about the goal with a confused "The goal? You mean our objectives for the month?" That's sure to strike a chord with a lot of readers. At an operational level, measure your success toward the goal with these three metrics: Throughput - The rate at which the system generates money through sales. Inventory - The money that the system has invested in purchasing things which it intends to sell. Operational expense - The money the system spends in order to turn inventory into throughput. You could rephrase it this way - and someone does, a bit later in the book: Throughput - Goods out; the money coming in. Inventory - Materials in; the money currently inside the system. Operational expense - Effort in; the money going out. Obviously, your job is to minimize expense and inventory and maximize throughput. Adjust the flow of product to match demand. In particular, don't trim capacity to match demand. It's a standard cost-cutting procedure, sure. But you'll need that capacity later, if you're serious about increasing throughput. Find bottlenecks. If manufacturing is what's limiting your throughput, then the problem isn't that people aren't working hard enough. You have bottlenecks in your manufacturing processes that are holding up everything else. Find the bottlenecks and do everything you can to fix them. Increase their efficiency, even at the expense of efficiency in non-bottleneck places, because the efficiency of a bottleneck directly determines the efficiency of the entire process, all the way through final payment. In the book, a variety of steps are taken to "elevate" and circumvent the bottlenecks. This is where the results start showing up on the bottom line. Soon the plant can actually use information from the bottleneck to do an effective job of scheduling work and (for the first time) reliably predicting when orders w... ...deas in novel form. There were already a dozen essays or articles on manufacturing management paradigms; you couldn't sell those. Novels sell better than essays. They're more readable. Once you realize that managers will buy thousands of copies of a "business novel" and make it required reading for their subordinates, a novel is the only way to go. (Also, The Goal was originally intended as marketing for Goldratt's plant management software company.) My main objection to The Goal is that it's fiction. Rogo makes a few changes, and his problems miraculously go away. It just works. Granted, the policies seem like good sense. But the unrealistic points are glossed over. Maybe plant managers in real life have the authority to adopt dramatic changes in the way they operate, the way Rogo did. Maybe it's easy to convince your top accountant that all his models are wrong, even though you have no accounting experience yourself. Maybe the average plant has an IT department that can create new scheduling software out of thin air in a few days. Maybe not. Goldratt claims a lot of real-life plant managers say they've turned The Goal into a documentary. That's a book I haven't read yet. Eliyahu M. Goldratt's The Goal Essay -- Goldratt The Goal Here are the principles behind the dramatic turnaround story in The Goal. The goal of a manufacturing organization is to make money. Jonah poses this as a question: "What is the goal?" and Rogo actually struggles with it for a day or two, but any manager or executive that can't answer that question without hesitation should be fired without hesitation. But then again, the goal isn't clear to everyone. One of the characters in the book, an accountant, responds to an offhand comment about the goal with a confused "The goal? You mean our objectives for the month?" That's sure to strike a chord with a lot of readers. At an operational level, measure your success toward the goal with these three metrics: Throughput - The rate at which the system generates money through sales. Inventory - The money that the system has invested in purchasing things which it intends to sell. Operational expense - The money the system spends in order to turn inventory into throughput. You could rephrase it this way - and someone does, a bit later in the book: Throughput - Goods out; the money coming in. Inventory - Materials in; the money currently inside the system. Operational expense - Effort in; the money going out. Obviously, your job is to minimize expense and inventory and maximize throughput. Adjust the flow of product to match demand. In particular, don't trim capacity to match demand. It's a standard cost-cutting procedure, sure. But you'll need that capacity later, if you're serious about increasing throughput. Find bottlenecks. If manufacturing is what's limiting your throughput, then the problem isn't that people aren't working hard enough. You have bottlenecks in your manufacturing processes that are holding up everything else. Find the bottlenecks and do everything you can to fix them. Increase their efficiency, even at the expense of efficiency in non-bottleneck places, because the efficiency of a bottleneck directly determines the efficiency of the entire process, all the way through final payment. In the book, a variety of steps are taken to "elevate" and circumvent the bottlenecks. This is where the results start showing up on the bottom line. Soon the plant can actually use information from the bottleneck to do an effective job of scheduling work and (for the first time) reliably predicting when orders w... ...deas in novel form. There were already a dozen essays or articles on manufacturing management paradigms; you couldn't sell those. Novels sell better than essays. They're more readable. Once you realize that managers will buy thousands of copies of a "business novel" and make it required reading for their subordinates, a novel is the only way to go. (Also, The Goal was originally intended as marketing for Goldratt's plant management software company.) My main objection to The Goal is that it's fiction. Rogo makes a few changes, and his problems miraculously go away. It just works. Granted, the policies seem like good sense. But the unrealistic points are glossed over. Maybe plant managers in real life have the authority to adopt dramatic changes in the way they operate, the way Rogo did. Maybe it's easy to convince your top accountant that all his models are wrong, even though you have no accounting experience yourself. Maybe the average plant has an IT department that can create new scheduling software out of thin air in a few days. Maybe not. Goldratt claims a lot of real-life plant managers say they've turned The Goal into a documentary. That's a book I haven't read yet.

Unpaid Seller

Unpaid Seller Definition: In a transaction of sale it is not possible to avoid credit sales. In credit sales there is a risk of a debtor not paying the price of the goods even after the credit period is over. The seller of the goods therefore must possess some rights which he can use to secure payment of the price. If the recovery of the price is not possible due to the reason of bankruptcy of the buyer, he must have some other remedies. The Sale of Goods Act has made elaborate provisions regarding the rights of an unpaid seller.The term ‘unpaid seller' may be defined as the seller to whom the full price of the goods sold has not been paid. The legal definition of ‘unpaid seller' is given in Section 45 of the Sale of Goods Act, as under: â€Å"The seller of the goods is deemed to be an unpaid seller within the meaning of this Act: (a) When the whole of the price has not been paid or tendered; (b) When a bill of exchange or other negotiable instrument has been received as conditional payment and the condition on which it was received has not been fulfilled by reason of the dishonor of the instrument or otherwise. Features of the unpaid seller 1. He must sell goods on the cash basis and must be unpaid. 2. If he sells on credit basis, he is not an unpaid seller during the period of credit. 3. The term of credit has expired and the price has not been paid to him. 4. He must be unpaid wholly or partially. If a part of price remains unpaid, he is unpaid. 5. When the price is paid in the form of negotiable instruments and it has been dishonored. 6. If buyer offers payment and seller refuses to accept, the seller is not an unpaid seller. . Party A sells a car on cash basis to party B and the price has not been received yet.. 8. A sells good to B on 5 months credit period and B turns insolvent after 2 months. 9. A sells TV set to B on the same day cheque basis, the cheque is dishonored due to insufficient. SALE OF GOODS ACT Contract of Sale: Sale and agreem ent to sell (1) A contract of sale of goods is a contract whereby the seller transfers or agrees to transfer the property in goods to the buyer for a money consideration called the price.There may be a contract of sale between 1 part owner and another. (2) A contract of sale may be absolute or conditional. (3) Where, under a contract of sale, the property in the goods is transferred from the seller to the buyer, the contract is called a sale: but, where the transfer of the property in the goods is to take place at a future time or subject to some condition thereafter to be fulfilled, the contract is called an agreement to sell. 4) An agreement to sell becomes a sale when the time elapses or the conditions are fulfilled subject to which the property in the goods is to be transferred. Capacity to buy and sell-sale of necessaries to persons incompetent to contract Capacity to buy and sell is regulated by the general law concerning capacity contract and to transfer and acquire property: Provided that, where necessaries are sold and delivered to an infant or minor or to a person who by reason of mental incapacity or drunkenness is incompetent to contract, he must pay a reasonable price therefor. Necessaries†, in this section, means goods suitable to the condition in life of such infant or minor or other person and to his actual requirements at the time of the sale and delivery. Contract  of  sale, how made Subject to the provisions of this Act and of any Act in that behalf, a contract of sale may be made in writing or by word of mouth or partly in writing and partly by word of mouth or may be implied from the conduct of the parties. Provided that nothing in this section shall affect the law relating to corporations.Sale and agreement to sell goods on credit in course of retail trade to be accompanied by invoice (1)A sale of goods on creditor an agreement to sell goods on credit in the course of trade shall not be enforceable by action at the suit of the s eller, unless- (a) at the time of the sale or agreement to sell, an invoice or docket, serially numbered, be made in writing in duplicate, both original and duplicate containing- (i) the serial number; ii) the date of the transaction; (iii) the name of the buyer; (iv) the nature and, except in the case of goods exempted from this provision by order of the Minister, the quantity of the goods, in the English language and in figures; and (v)  the price in English words or figures; and b) at the time of delivery of the goods, the original or duplicate of the invoice or docket be delivered to the buyer or to some person to whom the goods may properly be delivered on his behalf: Provided that the provisions of this section shall not apply to an agreement to sell, over a period of time, goods of nature such as are commonly delivered at regular intervals, such as newspapers, bread or milk, or to any sale in pursuance of such agreement, where a written order signed by the buyer or his agen t in that behalf is given to the seller at the time of the agreement to sell. 2) In this section- â€Å"docket† includes a packing note, delivery note or other printed form customarily used for recording the particulars of a sale; â€Å"sale or agreement to sell in the course of trade† means a sale or an agreement to sell to a person by or on behalf of a person who carries on the business of selling goods. Duties of seller and buyer 28. It is the duty of the seller to deliver the goods and of the buyer to accept and pay for them in accordance with the terms of the contract of sale. Payment and delivery prima facie concurrent conditions 9. Unless otherwise agreed, delivery of the goods and payment of the price are concurrent conditions, that is to say, the seller must be ready and willing to give possession of the goods to the buyer in exchange for the price and the buyer must be ready and willing to pay the price in exchange for possession of the goods. Rules as to del ivery 30. -(1) Whether it is for the buyer to take possession of the goods or for the seller to send them to the buyer is a question depending in each case on the contract express or implied between the parties.Apart from any such contract express or implied, the place of delivery is the seller's place of business if he has one, and if not, his residence: Provided that, if the contract be for the sale of specific goods which to the knowledge of the parties when the contract is made are in some other place, then that place is the place of delivery. (2) Where, under the contract of sale, the seller is bound to send the goods to the buyer but no time for sending them is fixed, the seller is bound to send them within a reasonable time. 3) Where the goods, at the time of sale, are in the possession of a third person, there is no delivery by seller to buyer unless and until such third person acknowledges to the buyer that he holds the goods on his behalf: Provided that nothing in this sec tion shall affect the operation or the issue or transfer of any document of title to goods. (4) Demand or tender of delivery may be treated as ineffectual unless made at a reasonable hour. What is a reasonable hour is a question of fact. (5) Unless otherwise agreed, the expenses of and incidental to putting the goods into a deliverable state must be borne by the seller.Rights of an Unpaid Seller (A) Rights against the Goods: Unpaid seller's rights against the goods may be discussed under the following two heads, namely: 1. Where the ownership of the goods has transferred to the buyer: In this case, the unpaid seller has the following rights: (a) Right of lien. (b) Right of stoppage of goods in transit. (c) Right of resale. 2. Where the ownership of the goods has not transferred to the buyer: In this case, the unpaid seller has the right of withholding the delivery of goods sold. (B) Rights against the Buyer: Unpaid seller has the following rights against the buyer: a) Suit for price . (b) Suit for damages. (c) Suit for interest. (d) Suit for repudiation of contract. The Unpaid seller of goods who is in possession of them is entitled to retain his possession until payment or tender of the price in following cases, namely: (a) Where the goods have been sold without any stipulations as to credit, (b) Where the goods have been sold on credit, but the term of credit has expired, and (c) Where the buyer becomes insolvent. † This right can be exercised by the unpaid seller if the following conditions are satisfied: (i)The unpaid seller must be in actual possessions of the goods sold. ii) The unpaid seller can retain the goods only for the payment of the price of the goods. The right of lien is linked with the possession of the goods and not with the title of the goods. Thus, the goods must be in actual possession of the seller. It is, however, not necessary that he should possess the goods as an owner. He can exercise the right of lien, even if he is possessing the goods as an agent or bailee for the buyer [Section 47 (2)]. The important legal provisions relating to the unpaid seller's right of lien may be stated as under: 1.Where the goods are sold without any stipulation as to credit (i. e. in case of cash sale), the unpaid seller may retain the goods if the buyer fails to pay the whole price [Section 47(1)(a)]. He cannot retain the goods for any other charge e. g. maintenance,charge of storage during the exercise of lien. 2. Where the goods are sold on credit, the unpaid seller may retain the goods if the buyer fails to pay the whole price after the expiry of credit period. [Section 47 (1) b)] 3. Where the buyer becomes insolvent, the unpaid seller may retain the possession of the goods until the whole price is paid.It is so because, the law does not compel a person to deliver the goods to an insolvent [Section 47 (1) (c)]. 4. Where the unpaid seller has delivered a part of the goods, he may exercise his lien on the remaining part of th e goods. But where the part delivery is made under the circumstances which show an agreement to waive a lien, the seller cannot retain the goods [Section 48]. 5. The right of lien is indivisible in nature. And, the seller cannot be compelled to deliver a part of the goods on payment of proportionate price of the goods. 1.By delivery of goods to the carrier: The unpaid seller loses his right of lien over the goods when the goods are delivered to some person ( a carrier or other bailee) for the purpose of transmission to the buyer [Section 49 (1) (a)] 2. By delivery of goods to the buyer: The unpaid seller also loses his right of lien when he delivers the goods to the buyer or his agent [Section 49 (1) (b)]. 3. By waiver of the lien; The right of lien is for the benefit of the seller. If he like, he may waive his right. And by waiver, the lien is lost [Section 49 (1) (c)]. The waiver may be express or implied.This right is contained in Section 50 of the Sale of Goods Act, which provid es that where the buyer becomes insolvent, and the unpaid seller has parted with the possession of the goods, he can stop the goods in transit until the price is paid or tendered (I. e. , offered) to him. The right can be exercised if the following conditions are satisfied: (a)The buyer has become insolvent. (b) The goods are in the course of transit, i. e. , the goods have gone out of the actual possession of the seller. But they have not reached in the possession of the buyer. c) The unpaid seller can stop the goods in transit only for the payment of the price of the goods. Duration of Transit The duration of transit is the period between the commencement and end of transit. The transit commences from the time when the goods are delivered to the middleman (i. e. , carrier or other bailee), and it continue till the buyer or his agent takes the delivery of the goods [Section 51 (1)]. The important provisions relating to duration of transit are as follows: (a) Where the goods are rej ected by the buyer and the carrier continue to have the possession of the goods, the transit does not come to an end [Section 51 (4)]. b) Where the goods are delivered in parts, the seller may stop the remainder of goods unless the delivery of part of the goods shows an intention to give up the possession of the whole of the goods [Section 51 (7)]. (c) Where the goods are delivered to a ship chartered by the buyer, then it is a question of fact in each case whether the carrier is acting independently or as an agent of the buyer. If the circumstances show that the carrier is acting as an agent of the buyer, then the transit comes to an end as soon as the goods are loaded on board the ship [Section 51 (5)]. Termination (or Loss) of Right of Stoppage in TransitUnder the following circumstances, the transit comes to an end and the right of stoppage in transit is lost. 1. Interception by the buyer: Sometimes, the buyer or his agent takes the delivery of the goods from the carrier (middle man) before the goods arrive at the appointed destination. In such cases, the transit comes to an end. [Section 51 (2)]. 2. Carrier's acknowledgement to the buyer: Sometimes, after the arrival of the goods at the appointed destination, the carrier acknowledges to the buyer or his agent that now he is holding the goods on buyer's behalf. In such cases, the transit comes to an end. Section 51 (3)]. 3. Carrier's wrongful refusal to deliver the goods to the buyer: (Section 51(6)) The important point here is that the refusal should be wrongful i. e. without any just cause. Eg. If the carrier refuse to deliver the goods because of non payment of freight charges, the refusal is not wrongful. Unpaid seller's right of resale is contained in Section 54 (2) of the Sale of Goods Act, which provides that if the buyer fails to pay or offer the price within a reasonable time, the unpaid seller has the right to resell the goods in the following circumstances: (a) Where the goods are of perishable n ature, b) Where the unpaid seller has exercised his right of lien or stoppage in transit and gives a notice to the buyer of his intention to resell the goods. And also (c) Where the unpaid seller has expressly reserved his right of resale. 1. Where the goods are perishable: The seller may resell the goods to another person within a reasonable time. The term ‘reasonable time' is a. 2. Where the seller expressly reserves his right of resale: It may be noted that in such cases, the seller is not required to give notice of resale.He is entitled to recover damages from the original buyer even if no notice of resale is given. 3.. Where the unpaid seller has exercised his right of lien or of stoppage in transit and gives notice to the buyer of his intention to resell the goods: If after the receipt of such notice, the buyer does not pay or tender the price within a reasonable time, the seller may resell the goods. In such cases, on the resale of the goods, the seller is also entitled to: (a)Recover the difference between the contract price and resale price, from the original buyer, as damages. b)Retain the profit if the resale price is higher that the contract price. However, if the goods are resold by the seller without giving any notice to the buyer, the seller cannot recover the loss suffered on resale. Moreover, if there is any profit on resale he must return it to the original buyer, i. e. , he cannot keep such surplus with him [Section 54 (2)]. In this sense, the notice of resale becomes obligatory, i. e. legally compulsory. Right of Withholding Delivery and Rights against BuyerRight of Withholding Delivery: Sometimes the ownership of the goods sold is not transferred to the buyer. In such cases the seller has the right of Withholding Delivery of the goods sold, if the buyer fails to pay the price. It may be noted that this right is in addition to other remedies available to the seller. This right is similar to and co-extensive with the right of lien and stoppage in transit [Section 46 (2)]. Rights against the Buyer The unpaid seller has the following rights against the buyer : 1. Suit for price:Where the buyer fails to pay the price of the goods in terms of the contract, the seller can file a suit against the buyer for recovery of the price [Section 55]. 2. Suit for damages for non-acceptance of goods: Where the seller is ready and willing to deliver the goods to the buyer, but the buyer wrongfully neglects or refuses to accept the goods and pay for them, then the seller may bring a legal action against the buyer for the recovery of damages suffered due to non-acceptance of the goods [Section 56]. 3.Suit for damages for repudiation of the contract before the due date of delivery of goods: Where the buyer repudiates (i. e. , puts an end to) the contract before the due date of delivery of the goods, the seller has the following options [Section 60]: (i) He may not immediately take any action against the buyer, and treat the contract as subsisting and wait till the date of delivery of goods. (ii) He may immediately treat the contract as repudiated and bring the legal action against the buyer for the recovery of the damages. . Suit for interest: Where the seller tenders the goods, but the buyer fails to accept and pay for them, then the seller may file a suit for the recovery of the price. In such a suit, the seller may also claim the interest on the amount of price payable by the buyer The court may award the interest from the date of tender of the goods or from the date when the price if payable. The rate of interest to be awarded is at the discretion of the court.It may however, be noted that the interest can be recovered by the seller only when he is entitled to recover the price. Thus, when the seller's only remedy is for damages, he cannot file a suit for interest [Section 61]. Reservation of right of disposal (Section 25). – 1. Where there is a contract for the sale of specific goods or where goods are subsequently appropriated to the contract, the seller may, by the terms of the contract or appropriation, reserve the right of disposal of the goods until certain conditions are fulfilled.In such case, notwithstanding the delivery of the goods to a buyer or to a carrier or other bailee for the purpose of transmission to the buyer, the property in the goods does not pass to the buyer until the conditions imposed by the seller are fulfilled. 2. Where goods are shipped or delivered to a railway administration for carriage by railway and by the bill of lading or railway receipt, as the case may be, the goods are deliverable to the order of the seller or his agent, the seller is prima facie deemed to reserve the right of disposal. . Where the seller of goods draws on the buyer for the price and transmits to the buyer the bill of exchange together with the bill of lading or, as the case may be, the railway receipt, to secure acceptance or payment of the bill of exchange, the buyer is bound to return the bill of lading or the railway receipt if he does not honour the bill of exchange; and, if he wrongfully retains the bill of lading or the railway receipt, the property in the goods does not pass to him. Explanation. In this section, the expressions† railway† and† railway administration† shall have the meanings respectively assigned to them under the Indian Railways Act, 1890 . ] (9 of 1890 . ) Buyer’s right against seller Suit for damages for non-delivery When the seller wrongfully refuses to deliver the goods to the buyer, the buyer may sue the seller for damages for non-delivery (Sec. 57) Suit for specific performance Where there is a breach of contract for sale of specific goods, the buyer may file a suit for specific performance.The remedy is granted when subject matter of the contract is rare goods, say, a picture by a dead painter (Sec. 58) Suit for damages for breach of warranty Where there is a breach of warranty, the buyer is entitled to sue for damages if he had paid the price to the seller. But if he has not paid the price yet, he may ask the seller for a reasonable reduction in theprice. (Sec. 59) Suit for cancellation and damages for breach of contract Where there is a breach of contract by the seller, the buyer may avoid the contract and claim damages. Suit for recovery of price with interestIf the buyer has already paid the price to the seller and the seller does not deliver the goods to thebuyer, he can sue the seller for refund of price and interest at a reasonable rate. (Sec. 61) Examples A case of an unpaid seller Case 1 Sir, If a sale deed has been entered saying that the consideration has been paid via a Demand Draft (i. e. issued by the Bank on account of loan). However the demand draft has not actually been encashed, as the loan was subsequently cancelled. However believing on the fact the DD will be encashed the seller signed the Sale Deed.Now as the amount is not actually paid, what ca n be the means to get the unpaid money? If in the suit for recovery of balance amount the buyer is unable to pay the remaining consideration, then what other relief can be provided by the court of law? The buyer got the loan sanctioned by concealing certain facts, so the DD was issued. However before the disbursement the Bank came to know of the facts and the loan got cancelled. That is how the DD could not be encashed. The Bank had issued the DD on the basis of certain facts. However certain important facts were concealed by the buyer from the Bank.Just before the DD could be encashed the Bank came to know the facts and they cancelled the DD. As a result the seller could not get the consideration. Case 2 Please my fellow mates i need urgent help on this    Mr. J sells and consigns certain goods to Mr. S for cash and sends the Railway Receipt to him. Mr. S becomes insolvent and while the goods are in transit, he assigns the Railway Receipt to Mr. N who does not know that Mr. S is insolvent. Mr. J being an unpaid seller wants to exercise his rights. Advise:    (a) whether Mr. J can exercise the right of stoppage of goods in transit ? b) would your answer be different if Mr. N was aware of Mr. J’s insolvency before the assignment of the Railway Receipt in favour of Mr. N ? (a)Mr. J cannot exercise the right of stoppage of goods in transist, because the goods are being taken by Mr. N in good faith and for consideration. (b)Yes, Mr. J in this case can exercise his right of stoppage of goods in Transit, as Mr. N has not acted in good faith. (Refer to section 27 of The Sale of Goods Act, 1930) Ref: http://www. caclubindia. com/forum/unpaid-seller-142227. asp#. UKXVHIdJNGQ

Thanksgiving essays

Thanksgiving essays Thanksgiving is one of Americas most treasured holidays and traditions. While there are some constants in the way we observe the day, it can mean different things to different people. The American Thanksgiving holiday began as a feast in the early days of the American colonies almost 400 years ago. In 1620, a boat filled with more than 100 people sailed across the Atlantic Ocean from England to settle in the New World. This religious group had begun to question the beliefs of the Church of England and they wanted to separate from it. The pilgrims settled in what is now the state of Massachusetts, and their first winter in the New World was difficult. They had arrived too late to grow any crops, and without fresh food, half the colonist died from diseases which the contracted on the voyage from England. The following spring the Iroquois Indians befriended the pilgrims and taught them how to grow corn, something the colonist never had done before. They showed them other crops to grow in the unfamiliar soil and how to hunt and fish. In the autumn of 1621, plentiful crops of corn, barley, beans and pumpkins were harvested. The colonists had much to be thankful for, so a feast was planned. They invited the local Indian chief and 90 Indians. The Indians brought deer to roast with the turkeys and other wild game offered by the colonists. The colonists had learned how to cook cranberries and different kinds of corn and squash dishes from the Indians. In following years, many o f the original colonists celebrated the autumn harvest with a feast of thanks. After the United States became an independent country, Congress recommended one yearly day of thanksgiving for the whole nation to celebrate. George Washington suggested the date November 26 as Thanksgiving Day and then in 1863, at the end of the long civil war, Abraham Lincoln asked all Americans to set aside the last Thursday in November as...