660-833-5563

Offer and acceptance essay

For this case difficulties issue is actually a valid agreement is made between Tina and Yatie, and whether the the offer simply by Yatie was revoked or not. Relating to (Miller & Jentz, 2010) just about every contract calls for atleast two parties. This provides the offeror as well as the offeree. The offerer is definitely the party whom makes the give, and the offeree is the person to whom the offer was created to.

Remember: This is just a sample from a fellow student. Your time is important. Let us write you an essay from scratch

Get essay help

OFFER

As per (Clarkson, Miller, Jentz, & Cross, 2009) an offer is actually a promise or perhaps commitment to perform or not to do a certain factor.

And there are three elements for an effective give to be legally bounding through the common rules. They are: the intention must be serious, their terms needs to be definite, and must be communicated to the oferee. In this case Yatie sends the offer letter proposing to deliver hancrafts to Tina. The offer plainly satisfies these ingredients. Firstly it is evident that Yatie’s critical intention as she wanted a drafted acceptance from Tina, while an objective aproach.

If we look in to the case of Lucy v. Zehmer, 196 Va. 493; 84 S i9000. E. second 516 [1954], the parties signed a doc which was intended for the sale of land and it was joining.

Similarly in this case the objective to create legal relations is definitely evident in the Yaties request to Barre?o to send a written approval. Secondly it includes clear conditions (to supply handcrafts) of what they are going to do. The offer from Yatie was very clear in this case, and unlike in the matter of Ahmad Meah & Anor v. Nacodah Merican [1890] 4 Ky 583 exactly where offer was too vague. And for the past element, the communication with the offer was complete because it was received by Tinaja (the designed party) on 4th September 2011 then when it becomed knowledge to Tina, in accordance with the section 4(1) of the Contracts Action 1950: Act 136 (CA) So the provide by Yatie was complete.

ACCEPTANCE

Considering the acceptance, Tina’s acknowledgement was communicated by her staff Raki. Acceptance is definitely the voluntary arrangement to the terms of the offer by offeree (Clarkson, Miller, Jentz, & Get across, 2009). While Tina requested her staff Anis (an agent for Tina although Tina is a principal) to noitify her acceptance in the offer to Yatie. In accordance to (Schneeman, 2010) due to fiduciary romantic relationship between the agent and the main, the agent can make up to behalf of the principal. If perhaps Anis approved the present as in the situation of Powell v Lee [1908] 99 LT 284, then the popularity will be placed as not really communicated. In this case Anis was given actual authority via Tina by granting specifically verbally to simply accept the proposal of Yatie by asking to fernkopie the popularity. When Raki telephoned on 7th September 2011 to Yatie’s office to confirm the acceptance, that is also acceptance enough, as with the case of Tinn versus Hoffman [1873] 29 LUXURY TOURING 271 the ruling was although a writen approval is requested, other methods such as telegram and mental messeges works extremely well as means of acceptance.

Also in the case of Adams v Lindsell [1818] EWHC KB J59 it was held that which the acceptance was communicated although the acceptance notice got misdirected and late. Therefore Tina’s acceptance will be effective upon 6th Sept. 2010 2011. Once Anis submitted the page on 6th September 2011, the popularity was accomplished; as as a result moment onwards the power over delivering the message beyond control by simply Anis on behalf of Tina. Section 4(2)(a) of CA affirms so for the acceptor. And in respect to (Miller & Jentz, 2010) intended for such conditions the ‘mail box rule’, which is also reffered to because the ‘postal rule’ and also the ‘deposited approval rule’ will apply. Which rule was formed to avoid the confusion of situations such as this case of Tina and Yatie.

CONCERN

Consideration accounts for00 the assure. And if there is not any consideration within an agreement, the contract would be void according to Section twenty six of CA. In this case Tina commited to obtain Yatie’s provide of handi crafts supply, and the commitment can be consideration enough as per Section 2(d) of CA. Yatie will expect Tina to complete her transaction. And with Tina’s acceptance, her commitment probably will have afflicted her other business activities, and in addition, she probably include rejected other business opportunities and offers due to her commitment to Yatie. Hence the consideration has passed between Yatie and Tina.

REVOCATION

If the revocation from the offer can be sent the acceptance is posted. As well as the outcome is usually that the revocation by offoror will only be effective if the revocation turns into knowledge for the offeree. Nevertheless the oferee dispatches the acceptance, it is going to instantly work. The case of Byrne versus Van Tienhoven [1880] 5 CPD 344 illustrates the acceptance & revocation of the offer by simply postal regulation. In that case the reality are which the revocation of the offer only will be communicated when the offeree receive it. And not within the date the offeror posts the reversal, overturning, annulment. Section 4(2)(b) of CALIFORNIA gives the state that the offerors revocation will simply be completed when the intended party is aware about it.

And for the reversal, overturning, annulment SMS in 8th Sept. 2010 2011 by Yatie probably would not apply, when it was sent following your acceptance by simply Tina which has been on the 6th September 2011. For example set up Yatie’s TEXT was delivered before the popularity, the reversal, overturning, annulment will continue to not work because as per the section 4(2)(b) of CALIFORNIA. But if we look into the case of Holwell Securities v Hughes [1974] 1 WLR 155, the postal rule was overruled, since the accused had particular to give the acceptance notice on paper before a certain deadline and was held that the offeror should actually obtain it. Depending on this earth, Yatie can easily claim that the lady had particular the popularity to be succumbed writing and she did not actually get the acceptance.

But once we look in the section your five (3) of the CA, a proposal might be revoked at any time before the conversation of its acceptance, and is complete since against the donner, but not after. And thus the above mentioned said circumstance (Holwell versus Hughes) can be overruled by the contracts Act. And in this case offer, approval and thought were finish. And reversal, overturning, annulment by Yatie was not complete since Barre?o did not acquire it before her approval. So , looking in to the information, its highly probable to get a valid assure to exist between Yatie and Tina.

1

Related essay

Category: Law,

Topic: This case,

Words: 1131

Views: 595