HELLO TUTORS USE THE CASE STUDY BELOW TO ANSWER THE QUESTION

Question 2

Relevant Law:As contract law assignment contract is the formation of an offer combined with acceptance which is supported by consideration by the capable parties who have a legally binding legal intention. (Latimer, 2012)

When the offeror conveys his intention of any act/omission to the offeree with the expectation that such communication would be confirmed by an offeree then it is an offer in law (Smith v Hughes [1871]. An offer can be made by words, in written form or by conduct (Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co (1891) but as per Felthouse v Bindley (1862) the offeree must be in the knowledge of the same in order to consider the offer valid and enforceable in law.

Whenever an offer is made as described in this assignment in contract law, then, the offeree when gave his approval to the offer terms results in an acceptance and is held in Empirall Holdings v Machon (1988). As per Stevenson Jaques& Co v McLean (1880) an acceptance should coincide with the offer terms otherwise such an acceptance is invalid and is considered as counter offer.

Further, when an acceptance is made then as per Brambles Holdings Ltd v Bathurst City Council (2001) an acceptance should reach the knowledge of the offeror in order to be enforceable. Non transmission of acceptance is not a valid acceptance and is held in Latec Finance Ltd v Knight (1969).. (Bailey, 2014)

Further, if acceptance is made through letters then the acceptance is complete when the letter is posted and is held in Adams v Lindsell (1818).

Applicable Law:As per the facts,

On 5th September, Robert had written a letter to Cameron wherein he offered to sell 50 metric tonnes of wheat @ $250 per metric tonne.

As per Felthouse v Bindley an offer when made must reach the mind of the offeree and he must be aware of the terms of the offer in order to consider any offer to be enforceable in law. Since the offer made by Robert is in the knowledge of Cameron, thus, the offer is valid.

Now, on 7th September, a reply is posted by Cameron wherein an acceptance is furnished but a term is included specifying that if nothing is heard from Robert then it will be assumed that the price of the offer is inclusive of delivery to his warehouse.

Generally, as per Adams v Lindsell as discussed in this assignment in contract law when an acceptance is made by post then it is binding immediately. But, the rule does not apply hear as the acceptance made by Cameron is not valid as a new term is incorporated by Cameron. Thus, as per Stevenson Jaques& Co v McLean a counter offer is made by Cameron to Robert on 7th September.Relevant Law:As contract law assignment contract is the formation of an offer combined with acceptance which is supported by consideration by the capable parties who have a legally binding legal intention. (Latimer, 2012)

When the offeror conveys his intention of any act/omission to the offeree with the expectation that such communication would be confirmed by an offeree then it is an offer in law (Smith v Hughes [1871]. An offer can be made by words, in written form or by conduct (Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co (1891) but as per Felthouse v Bindley (1862) the offeree must be in the knowledge of the same in order to consider the offer valid and enforceable in law.

Whenever an offer is made as described in this assignment in contract law, then, the offeree when gave his approval to the offer terms results in an acceptance and is held in Empirall Holdings v Machon (1988). As per Stevenson Jaques& Co v McLean (1880) an acceptance should coincide with the offer terms otherwise such an acceptance is invalid and is considered as counter offer.

Further, when an acceptance is made then as per Brambles Holdings Ltd v Bathurst City Council (2001) an acceptance should reach the knowledge of the offeror in order to be enforceable. Non transmission of acceptance is not a valid acceptance and is held in Latec Finance Ltd v Knight (1969).. (Bailey, 2014)

Further, if acceptance is made through letters then the acceptance is complete when the letter is posted and is held in Adams v Lindsell (1818).

Applicable Law:As per the facts,

On 5th September, Robert had written a letter to Cameron wherein he offered to sell 50 metric tonnes of wheat @ $250 per metric tonne.

As per Felthouse v Bindley an offer when made must reach the mind of the offeree and he must be aware of the terms of the offer in order to consider any offer to be enforceable in law. Since the offer made by Robert is in the knowledge of Cameron, thus, the offer is valid.

Now, on 7th September, a reply is posted by Cameron wherein an acceptance is furnished but a term is included specifying that if nothing is heard from Robert then it will be assumed that the price of the offer is inclusive of delivery to his warehouse.

Generally, as per Adams v Lindsell as discussed in this assignment in contract law when an acceptance is made by post then it is binding immediately. But, the rule does not apply hear as the acceptance made by Cameron is not valid as a new term is incorporated by Cameron. Thus, as per Stevenson Jaques& Co v McLean a counter offer is made by Cameron to Robert on 7th September.Relevant Law:As contract law assignment contract is the formation of an offer combined with acceptance which is supported by consideration by the capable parties who have a legally binding legal intention. (Latimer, 2012)

When the offeror conveys his intention of any act/omission to the offeree with the expectation that such communication would be confirmed by an offeree then it is an offer in law (Smith v Hughes [1871]. An offer can be made by words, in written form or by conduct (Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co (1891) but as per Felthouse v Bindley (1862) the offeree must be in the knowledge of the same in order to consider the offer valid and enforceable in law.

Whenever an offer is made as described in this assignment in contract law, then, the offeree when gave his approval to the offer terms results in an acceptance and is held in Empirall Holdings v Machon (1988). As per Stevenson Jaques& Co v McLean (1880) an acceptance should coincide with the offer terms otherwise such an acceptance is invalid and is considered as counter offer.

Further, when an acceptance is made then as per Brambles Holdings Ltd v Bathurst City Council (2001) an acceptance should reach the knowledge of the offeror in order to be enforceable. Non transmission of acceptance is not a valid acceptance and is held in Latec Finance Ltd v Knight (1969).. (Bailey, 2014)

Further, if acceptance is made through letters then the acceptance is complete when the letter is posted and is held in Adams v Lindsell (1818).

Applicable Law:As per the facts,

On 5th September, Robert had written a letter to Cameron wherein he offered to sell 50 metric tonnes of wheat @ $250 per metric tonne.

As per Felthouse v Bindley an offer when made must reach the mind of the offeree and he must be aware of the terms of the offer in order to consider any offer to be enforceable in law. Since the offer made by Robert is in the knowledge of Cameron, thus, the offer is valid.

Now, on 7th September, a reply is posted by Cameron wherein an acceptance is furnished but a term is included specifying that if nothing is heard from Robert then it will be assumed that the price of the offer is inclusive of delivery to his warehouse.

Generally, as per Adams v Lindsell as discussed in this assignment in contract law when an acceptance is made by post then it is binding immediately. But, the rule does not apply hear as the acceptance made by Cameron is not valid as a new term is incorporated by Cameron. Thus, as per Stevenson Jaques& Co v McLean a counter offer is made by Cameron to Robert on 7th September.

GIVE YOUR ANSWERS IN FULL DETAILS

1. An _____ made with free ____ to which the _____ is lawful but inadequate is _____.

2. When the ______ to an agreement is obtained by ____, the agreement is voidable at the option of

3. Where the ____ of ____ the parties is given by ____, the contract is_____.

4. A mistake as to ____ not in ____ in _____ has the same effect as _______.

5. An contract in ________restraint ofproceedings is void. It does not cover an agreement which

6. Prevention of unjust enrichment at the expense of others is the basis of ____.

7. The special _____ ie, the damages which arise due to so a special or unusual circumstances _____.

8. A ____ with the _____, which is beneficial for him, is ______.

9. Which is the following is false? An offer to be valid must;

10. When the consent to is obtained by coercion, the agreement is voidable at the option of