Acacia Ltd is a furniture manufacturer supplying large retail chains. On 1 January Acacia Ltd receives anorder from Dill Ltd to supply 1,000 dining room chairs made of oak for delivery on 1 March. Acacia Ltdimmediately emails Baltic Ltd, an importer of furniture-grade wood with whom they had often donebusiness in the past. The email states "Please confirm by return whether you are able to supply 1,000oak planks at 10 each in accordance with the attached specifications. Delivery within 48 hours ".Although the attachment is missing when it arrives in Baltic Ltd's inbox, Esther, Baltic Ltd's businessmanager, immediately replies, "Yes, definitely." She is not bothered by the missing attachment as sheis confident that the specifications will be the same as they had been in every previous order fromAcacia. Esther's reply goes straight into Acacia's "junk/spam" folder without being read by anyone atAcacia. Shortly after Esther emails her reply, another email from Baltic Ltd arrives. This one doescontain the attachment and states "Herewith the missing attachment." Esther reads this, discoveringthat the specifications are in fact different this time. She replies, "OK, but this time we have to charge15 per plank." This also goes straight into Acacia's "junk/spam" folder without being read. At the endof that business day, Clive, Acacia's procurement manager, discovers Esther's two replies when hechecks Acacia's 'junk/spam' folder, as he routinely does. Noticing the higher price requested inEsther's second email, Clive decides to reply only to her first email, and writes: "Great. Please goahead." Reading only Clive's reply, which appears at the top of his email, Esther does not see that hereplied to her first email but ignored her second email. She gives instructions for the planks to bereadied for delivery.When the planks have been delivered, Baltic Ltd sends Acacia Ltd an invoice for 15,000. Because itscontract with Dill Ltd was cancelled before Acacia Ltd could use the planks, Acacia Ltd does not want topay the invoice. Acacia Ltd would prefer to return the planks without being liable to pay anything forthem, but if that is not possible, Acacia Ltd wants to pay no more than 10,000.Advise Acacia Ltd as to how much they are liable to pay to Baltic Ltd. How, if at all, would your answerdiffer if Clive, having read Esther's two replies, had not responded to these but Acacia Ltd hadnevertheless delivered the planks