2.

Sweatshirt Ltd, which manages a chain of sports fitness centres, places the following

advertisement on its website, dated 5th January

Pay for one year's standard membership at a sweatshirt fitness Centre, and swim 400

Consecutive lengths in one of our pools by 10th January, and you will be rewarded with a free

one-year membership for your spouse. Happy swimming and Good luck!

Owing to bad publicity, resulting from some if its new members suffering heart attacks in its

swimming pools, on the morning of 8th January sweatshirt Ltd placed a prominent notice on

its website withdrawing the promotional membership campaign contained on its website,

Discuss the legal position of the parties in the following separate situations:

a) Andrew paid for a year's membership at his local sweatshirt fitness Centre on 7th

January. The following day he logged on to the sweatshirt website and noticed the

revocation. Nevertheless, he attempted to swim the 400 lengths that afternoon but

found that he did not have the stamina to complete more than 25 lengths.

b) Bernice applied for a year's membership on the moming of 10th January. Whilst

arranging for payment of her membership fee she was informed of sweatshirt Ltd.'s

promotion. As Bernice was a long-distance swimmer, she immediately rushed into

the changing rooms to prepare for the challenge. However, before entering the pool,

she was told sweatshirt Ltd.'s revocation by the pool attendant.

c) Cathy received free membership at the sweatshirt fitness Centre, Bristol, on 6th

January, having won a competition run by a local supermarket. She successfully swam 400 lengths, which was reported on the local television, but was subsequently

refused free membership for the spouse as she had not paid for her own membership.