tark Associates, a firm of architects, has been negotiating a contract with Leia for the provision of architectural services. All of their correspondence has been by email, and in that correspondence Leia has been trying to negotiate a lower price. Leia emails a final offer to Stark Associates at 2.00pm on August 13 and the architects email back their acceptance later on the same day, at 7.50pm. At 8.00pm, before Leia has read Stark Associates' email, she changes her mind and immediately sends an email to the architects seeking to revoke her offer. The architects ask you whether they have a contract with Leia. Which of the following is the CORRECT response? Question 13Answer a. Under the Electronic Transactions Act 1999 (Cth), Leia's revocation is effective because it was communicated before the offeror read the acceptance. b. Under the Electronic Transactions Act 1999 (Cth), Stark Associates' acceptance would not be effective until Leia has had a reasonable time to open the email of acceptance and read it. c. Under the Electronic Transactions Act 1999 (Cth), Leia's revocation would not be effective because the prior acceptance is deemed to occur when the email is capable of being retrieved by the addressee (i.e. when it arrives in Leia's inbox, even if she has not read it and does not know that it is there). d. The Electronic Transactions Act 1999 (Cth) would not apply, as the parties have not expressly agreed to use email