Ekaterina owned a farm in a remote region of Saskatchewan, which she had been trying to sell for several years. In late November, Rasheed faxed her an offer to purchase the property for $50 000 and asked that she quickly reply by fax or telegram. Two weeks later, Ekaterina responded with a letter that stated that, by coincidence, another person had recently expressed interest in the farm and that, in the circumstances, she would not sell for less than $60 000. Her message stated that if that price was satisfactory, the deal "could be completed immediately," and suggested January 1 as a closing date. Ekaterina's letter also asked Rasheed to reply by telephone or email to avoid delay. A week later, Ekaterina's letter was delivered to Rasheed's house. As he was abroad on business, his wife, Naima, opened it in his absence. Without Rasheed's authorization, Naima immediately sent a telegram to Ekaterina, stating that Rasheed would return in 10 days and asking that the offer be held open until that time. The telegram also indicated that Rasheed had earlier expressed interest in the property and stated that if he purchased the farm, he would not require the land until March, as it would not be possible to commence farming operations until the spring. Ekaterina did not reply to that telegram. Ten days later, Rasheed returned from abroad and promptly emailed Ekaterina to accept her offer to sell the farm for $60 000. She replied that she had sold the property to a third party the previous day and that her offer consequently was no longer open. Rasheed believes that since his acceptance was communicated before he was informed of the sale to the third party, a contract was formed between himself and Ekaterina. Is he correct? Was Ekaterina's offer still open when Rasheed purported to accept it? What factors would a judge consider in deciding that issue?