• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Contract Law [I] Formative Essay

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Contract Law [I] Formative Essay Adam Sinfield Group B2 In order to advise Brian, Charles and Diana the main issues that arise in this problem need to be identified. In order for a contract to exist there must be some form of offer and acceptance, in that order. Firstly, Alan claims that an offer was never really made, and if so it was revoked before acceptance, so did an offer exist? Alan also claims that no one accepted the offer, but Brian, Charles and Diana refuse this, so did acceptance occur? If the answer to both these questions is no, then no contract existed and nothing can be done, however if the answer is yes, then an enforceable contract is in place. If yes, then further problems arise. Who is entitled to the reward? As each walker took different actions and had different motives. An offer is often defined as "An expression of willingness to contract on certain terms made with the intention that a binding contract will exist once the offer is accepted"1 however adverts are usually classified as invitations to treat, rather than as an offer which are not legally binding (see Partridge v Crittenden2), however a problem occurs when an offer is unilateral, that is an offer made from the offeror to anyone, for example that of a reward for a missing pet. The offeror is obliged to pay the reward, but anyone who sees the advert is not obliged to go and look. ...read more.

Middle

This was used in the Carlhill case and it was decided that the advert covered the first point, and the usage of the smokeballs in the directed way covered point two. In the facts of this problem, the advert again covers the first point, as it states that a T-Shirt with the company's logo on must be worn, and the second point is covered by the fact that all three walkers collected a T-Shirt, and started the walk to London from Cardiff, as directed by the advert. It may also be relevant to note that the reason for accepting the offer is not relevant (see Williams v Cowardine5) so the fact that Diana didn't know about the reward until half way through the walk, and was only on the walk because she couldn't afford the train fair has no relevance. Another defence that would be used by Alan is the fact that the offer was revoked, so how relevant is this? As mentioned previously, an offer can be revoked at anytime prior to any acceptance, but again with this being unilateral, problems arise. The answer to whether the acceptance still stands can be found in Errington v Errington & Woods6. In this case, it was decided that acting on a promise is significant to acceptance and that the case is based on the point of view that once an offeree has started to perform, then revocation is not possible. ...read more.

Conclusion

However, part completion of this contract is not enforceable as he did not complete the conditions set out in the advert. Similar to Brian, in ordinary circumstances he might be able to negotiate a sum from Lucofizz for part completion, but with the financial troubles he is unlikely to receive anything, so I would recommend no further action. If he completed the walk in the allotted time, instead of pulling out, then he would be entitled to the reward, but by pulling out he forfeited the contract, leaving him with nothing. As to Diana, she fulfilled her obligations to the contract by wearing the T-Shirt and walking to London in seven days. Even though she didn't know about the offer from the start and despite having ulterior motives I would recommend that she pursues her claim by taking further actions. If Diana had not been told about the offer by Charles after the revocation and had completed the task anyway, she would have no claim and would not be entitled to the reward. I would recommend to Diana to pursue her claim as she is likely to receive an out of court settlement as Lucofizz would be keen to avoid any expensive litigation. 1 Richards P., Law of Contract (5th ed 2002, Longman) 2 [1968] 2 ALL ER 421 3 [1893] 1 QB 256 4 Treitel G.H., The Law of Contract (1st ed 1999, Sweet and Maxwell) 5 [1833] 5 Car & P 566 6 [1952] 1 KB 290 (CA) ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Law of Contract section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Law of Contract essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Contract Law - Offer And Acceptance

    3 star(s)

    The council's appeal was dismissed by the Court of Appeal. Timetable And Passenger Tickets * Issuing advertisement stating the times at and condition under which trains would run is an offer Railway Act 1998 s.123 13 * And for the bus service there is three different views on the point of contract concluded.

  2. Four ways in which a contract may be discharged.

    The amount they had spent after contract with Reed was clearly recoverable, since it had been spent in reliance on his performing as agreed, but the film company also wished to claim money spent in the preparatory stages, before Reed was signed.

  1. Contract law - Advise Sarah - The first thing to ascertain is whether the ...

    He attempted to claim the advertised reward, but it was held that, as he had provided the information in order to clear himself of the charge of murder, and not on or in reliance upon the offer of a reward19, he was not entitled to the reward.

  2. Contract Law

    To what communication does the rule extend The postal acceptance rule applies to forms of communication that are akin to mail but does not extend to any form of instantaneous communication, even if that communication bears some similarities to communication by post.

  1. I have been asked to advise a client on considering contracting with a building ...

    20 October Letter of revocation received in New York. The offeree had meanwhile resold the contract goods. The outcome of the case was the letter of revocation could not take effect until received (20 October). Simply posting a letter does not revoke the offer until it is received. Therefore there was no binding contract.

  2. Offer and Acceptance

    It is then up to the farmer to make a new offer. Sheena may decline the counter offer of � 35, but unless she decides to make a new offer, the offer at the moment would be � 35. It must be made clear whether it is a counter offer

  1. LAW OF CONTRACT. LAW 103. THE CONTENT OF THE CONTRACT.

    term to form part of their contract: it is not enough for the court to find that such a term would have been adopted by the parties as reasonable men if it had been suggested to them: it must have been a term that went without saying; a term necessary

  2. Evaluate the law of formation of contract in the context of modern methods of ...

    There is often a small distinction between a counter-offer and a request for information. The former terminates the offer while the latter leaves the offer open for acceptance; it is unlikely that a party to negotiations unless a commercial lawyer would be able to draw such a fine distinction between the two, but the difference is crucial.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work