Unformatted text preview: COMMERCIAL LAW EGOS GINA LOBITOS
CT0279494 Intake Code
PT-Dip ComHTM-18 October 04, 2017 1. The contract formed when was Alan and Damien have agreement
To be a legally binding a contract requires offer,acceptance,consideration. Besides
for the specific types of contract it need not to be in writing or indicate the writing.
The acceptance can be communicated to the offeror either by words or conduct but
usually not by silence.
A contract was formed between Alan & Damien on 4th November as although the
original offer on Facebook was not made to Damien, it was only made to “All my
friends who are students enrolled in or enrolling at Kaplan”. Damien’s message of
the 3rd Nov constitutes an offer and Alan communicated his acceptance on 4th Nov
by accepting his has and telling him he would deliver the textbook and notes on 7th
In this issues should be apply the case in Felthouse v Bindley (1862),Alan
acceptance must be positive and not passive.Alan accept the $200 pay for the
commercial law books.Therefore, the offeror cannot impose acceptance merely
because the offeree does not reject the offer.In ot er words, the case show
demonstrates that silence does not constitute acceptance. 2. Bernard’s legal position and remedies The key points to note is that when Bernard replied to the posting on Facebook that
he was keen to buy but would only pay $150 he was making a counter-offer to Alan
and became the offeror. As such he is not subsequently able to accept the original
offer merely by agreeing to its terms but has to get Alan to make the offer anew.
Posting $200 to Alan and then informing him without receiving a reply does not form
a contract as contracts can only be accepted by post, he is the offeror, and postal
acceptance was at least implicitly implied which is not the case. As Alan was already
contracted to Damien at this point it is clear that Damien owns the rights to notes so
Alan’s to acceptance of the money and subsequent delivery of the textbook amount
to Alan accepting the offer but misrepresenting to Bernard his ability to deliver his side of the consideration. Bernard should be able to sue for misrepresentation and
may have the contract invalidate plus receive damages as he was relying on
receiving the notes as part of his study planning.
In this issues must apply the case in Dickinson v Dodds (1876),in the first place Alan
already sale his book.Damien is the buyer because Alan accepted the money from
Damien in the Campus. 3. Charleen’s legal position and remedies Parties in domestic or social arrangements are generally not assumed to intend legal
consequence and the following facts make it even more unlikely a court would rule a
contract had been formed:1) Silence cannot be inferred from mere silence save in very exceptional
2) In asking to settle the cash on the 6th Nov she was asking Alan to accept a ...
View Full Document