Contract Law - offer and acceptance.
Contract Law- Offer and Acceptance Shabana Riaz Supervision Group 10 The given problem is concerned with whether or not an agreement has come into existence between Astonia PLC, and any of the three local companies, to sell them the widget machine. A contract is generally regarded as an agreement, which the courts will treat as binding, and where necessary, may enforce. One of the basic prerequisites for the existence of a contract is an offer and an acceptance of that offer, which together form the agreement. Most contracts are usually bilateral and an agreement comes into existence where one party makes an offer to be contractually bound by specified terms to another party who accepts the terms and communicates this to the offeror. It is the communication of the acceptance that makes the agreement binding. A contract can also be unilateral, here one party makes a conditional offer to another in return for performing or refraining from a particular act. The agreement becomes binding where the offeree performs the required act. One of the first issues raised is to establish whether the letters sent by Astonia PLC to the local companies are to be regarded as being an offer or an invitation to treat? It is important to make mention of the fact that the letters are invitations for the companies to make offers for the widget machine, that is they are invitations to tenders.
Law of Contract - Law 103
Law of Contract Law 103 Assignment 1 ~ Seaburn Cycles Gemma Bolt 053047962 A contract is a legally binding enforceable agreement between two or more parties. Where an issue of a breach of contract arises in court, the court has to decide whether or not a contract has been made. To do this they must establish whether an offer has been made or whether it was simply an invitation to treat. If an offer has been made the courts must then look to establish whether there has been an acceptance. An offer is a statement of willingness by one party to enter into a contract on certain terms made with the intention that it shall become binding on acceptance. Whereas an invitation to treat is an expression of willingness to enter into negotiations which will eventually lead to a contract being formed. Acceptance is an unqualified expression of assent to the terms of the contract proposed by the offeror. The first thing to establish is whether an offer or an invitation to treat was made. In this situation, following the case of Partridge v Crittenden [1968] 1 WLR 1204, the initial advertisement in the newspaper would constitute an invitation to treat. However Jason then phoned three people and told them "the stock is yours if you can go to £25,000 by 6pm on the 23rd. This would more than likely constitute to an offer which is open to acceptance as the offer was made with
This case is about the disagreement between Simpsons Ltd v Thowers Ltd. The carrier's liabilities will be discussed in three parts, firstly to resolve the problem, I am going to give a short description of the main components of the contract of carriag...
This case is about the disagreement between Simpsons Ltd v Thowers Ltd. The carrier's liabilities will be discussed in three parts, firstly to resolve the problem, I am going to give a short description of the main components of the contract of carriage of goods by sea Act 1971, secondly I will decide which of the Hague Visby rules or the Common law is applicable, and to finish I am going to apply the rules in looking for the liabilities of the carrier by searching the duties and the defences of the carrier for each good. I) What is the contract "Carriage of Goods by Sea?" Firstly, we have to check whether the case is governed by "the carriage of goods by sea", or not and Secondly, whether Simpsons and Thowers satisfy all the conditions of Carriage of Goods by Sea. When we are looking at the definition of the contract, the contract stipulates that: ( JCT Chuah, 7-01, p201) * The contract of carriage must be covered by a bill of lading or any similar document of title. * The carriage of goods is from a port in a contracting state. In the case, we know that the contract was covered by two bills of lading. They used one bill of lading for each product. The damage happened during the carrying which means during the application of the Act. As a consequence, the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1971 does apply. In the second part, we will see if the Hague Visby rules apply in
Void and voidable Contracts.
Void Contracts: A contract is void if it is worthless, that is, not really a contract at all. Some contracts made by minors, for example, are automatically void. Contracts may be declared void on the basis that they oblige the contracting parties to commit illegal acts. Damages cannot be claimed by a party injured by attempting to comply with a void contract. For example, if I contract to pay someone to shoot a TV game show host, and the would-be murderer decides to take the money and run without satisfying his part of the deal, then the courts will not assist me to recover the money. The illegality need not be as serious as murder for this to be the case. Some contracts may not be strictly void, but can be declared void. The distinction is important because when goods or property are exchanged under a voidable contract, title is passed. With a void contract no title passes, because effectively the contract never existed. Voidable Contracts: Unlike a void contract, whose legal status is as if it never existed, a voidable contract is one that remains in force until it is declared void by one of the contracting parties. For example, one of the parties may fraudulently misrepresent a service to be offered. The offended party may then declare the contract void and refuse to be bound by it. However, if goods are exchanged under the contract before it is voided, then title is
Case Analysis: Christine Brooks v. Cooke County Hospital District
Case Analysis #3 Christine Brooks v. Cooke County Hospital District Background Christine Brooks was placed on probation in February 1994, after working for ten years with the Cooke County Hospital District ("CCHD"), for exhibiting poor work attitude, breaching patient confidentiality, and engaging in personal business at work. CCHD terminated Brook's employment, while she was on probation, because of additional policy violations. Brooks filed suit against CCHD on December 28, 1994. This case is related to the employer-employee relationship and at-will employment. The big issues in this case seem to be: - Did a contract exist between Brooks and CCHD, as opposed to a traditional at-will employment? - Was there a violation of either the contract or the at-will employment doctrine by CCHD? - Was there a serious violation of policy by Brooks? The sub issues are: - Was there any discrimination or retaliation against Brooks? - Was Brooks being penalized twice for the same cause? - Was Brooks negligent in discussing the situation in an open setting? Christine Brooks' case Christine Brooks had been employed with CCHD for almost ten years. In 1994 she was terminated while on probation. The following text attempts to analyze Brooks' position and the approach that she should take to make her case against CCHD. Brooks' case should focus on proving that her status with CCHD
Offer and acceptance when forming a contract.
Aman, a car dealer, has a number of conversations with clients in his showroom. Bert states that he wishes to buy a particular Candida car on display in the showroom at £10,000, but Aman says that he could not sell it for less than £10,500. Aman says no more to Bert, but Bert assumes that the car is his for £10,500. Aman offers to sell a Delissimo car to Emma for £15,00 and says that she can let him know by Friday if she wants the car. On Thursday afternoon Fred pays Aman £20,000 for the same car. Emma sends Aman an e-mail on Friday to say that she wants the car. Aman makes an offer to sell a Grandino car, priced £22,000 to Harry who says he will think about it. Harry posts a letter to Aman the same day to say that he does want the car. Later that day Harry changes his mind and sends a fax message to Aman to say that he no longer wishes to buy the car after all. Consider whether Aman has made binding contracts with Bert, Emma, Fred and Harry. [50] This problem relates to offer and acceptance when forming a contract. In order for a contract to be made you need valid offer from the offeror and acceptance form the offeree. An offer is a proposal made in certain terms by the offeror with the intention of being bound by the proposal. Offers may be made in words, writing or conduct. In displaying his goods Aman is not providing offers to sell, merely
Property Law-bg
?? ? 1 ??????? ?? ????? ?????. ?? ???? ???? ?? ?????????? ?????????? ????? ? ???? ?????? ??????????. ???????, ??????? ? ????????? ?? ??. ? ??????? "????? ?????" ?? ????????? ??????? ????. . ???? ????????? ????? ?? ? ?????????? ?? ?????? ????? (??), ????? ??????? ????? ??????????????, ????? ?????????? ????? ? ?????????? - ?.?. ??????????? ? ??????????? ?? ????? ????? ????. ? ???? ?????? ?? ? ???? ?? ??????????? ?????????? ????? (??), ????? ?????? ????????? ?? ??????????? ?????????. 2. ??? ????? ?????? ?? ???????? ?????????? ?????? ? ?????? ??????????, ????? ?? ??????? ? ??????????? ?? ??????? ?? ??????????? ? ?? ?????????? ????? ?????. 3. ??? ????? ?????? ?? ???????? ?????????? ?????????? ?????, ????? ????? ??? ??????????? ?? ?????????????? ?????, ??? ?? ???????????? ?????????? ? ??????????? ?? ?????? ?????????? ?? ???????? ?? ??? ????? ????? ?????????? ??? ? ?? ??????? ?? ?????? ????? ???? ?? ?? ????????? ?? ????????????? ???????? ????? ????, ????? ?????? ?? ???????? ?? ????????? ?????? ?????. ??????? ?? ???????????? ?? ? ? ???????? ?????, ????? ? ??????? ??????????? ?????????, ??????? ? ???? ?? ????? ?????? ???????, ??????????? ????? ?? ????????? ?? ????????? ? ????. ??? ?? ?? ?? ?????? - ?????????? ????????, ?????? ???????????? ? ?????????, ? ?????????? ?? ?????????, ?? ? ????? ?? ???????? ? ?????? ?? ?? ?????????? ??? ??????? ???? - ??.110, ??.2, ??. ??????????
Several tests have been developed to identify and categorise different types of workers.
Several tests have been developed to identify and categorise different types of workers. The basic division for our purposes is between those who are employed persons and those who are self employed, and the distinction between these categories is that the employed person works under a contract of service, while the self-employed person works under a contract for services1. An important criterion for determining whether the relationship between employer and employee exists is the extent to which a person is under the direction and control of the other party with regard to the manner in which the work is done.2 It would be improper to use this test, where professional are involved, as it is likely that the employee will be qualified in a particular field, thus making direct control of the employee difficult. For example does a football manager have the right to control how his players play on the pitch, as questioned in Walker v Crystal Palace Football Club (1909). Despite this difficulty, a refinement to this test, where the "right to control" has been used a determinant factor.3 It is clear from these cases the higher the degree of control exercisable by the employer, the more likely that a contract of service exists4, but "the greater the skill required for an employee's work the less significant is control in determining whether the employee is under a contract of
Expressed Terms
Barry Problem This problem is related to express terms. These are terms which the parties write down or agree to orally. The terms within a contract have been sub-divided into conditions which is a major term and warranties which are a minor term. Conditions are vital terms of the contract which, if broken, entitles the injured party to repudiate the contract. It was defined by Lord Justice Fletcher Moulton in Wallis v Pratt as 'An obligation which goes directly to the substance of the contract that its non-performance may fairly be considered by the other party as a substantial failure to perform the contract at all'. Warranties are a subsidiary term of the contract and give rise to an action in damages only. It was defined in Wallis v Pratt as 'An obligation which, though it must be performed, does not go to the root of the contract.' Whether a term is a condition or a warranty is a question of the intention of the parties to be deduced from the circumstances of the cases. A clear example is given by Justice Blackburn who ruled on two similar cases within months of one another. In the case of Bettini v Gye, the warranty cannot be repudiated, but may claim damages, whereas with Poussard v Spiers the condition can both repudiate and claim damages. The term, 'the machine is able to pick potatoes at the rate of 100 per minute' is a condition which goes to the root of
Postal Acceptance Rule
Postal Acceptance Rule Contract is formed at the time and place an acceptance is communicated to the offeror. An acceptance must correspond to the offer. There is no particular method of acceptance prescribed by law. The appropriate method of acceptance will depend on the fact of each situation. The offerees may find themselves faced with two types of situation. First the offer may dictate a method of acceptance. It may indicate that acceptance should be sent by return fax by a certain date. The second broad category is where there is no indication in the offer of an appropriate method of acceptance. The general rule followed by offeree is that acceptance may be given by the same or an equally expedient method as adopted for the making of the offer. Hence it follows that until the acceptance is received by the offeror the offer may be revoked. In the late 19th century an exception to the general agreement for communication of an acceptance arose in order to avoid the extraordinary and mischievous consequences that would follow if it might be held that the offer might be revoked at any time until the letter accepting it had actually been received. This is the postal acceptance rule. The rule as accepted in Australia is "Where the circumstances are such that it must have been within the contemplation of the parties that, according to the ordinary usages of mankind, the post
