You've reached the end of your free preview.
Want to read all 8 pages?
Unformatted text preview: Introduction
Alan wanted to sell his commercial law textbook “Introduction to Business law in
Singapore” together with his exercise book. He posted his invitation on Facebook and
three parties, Bernard, Charleen and Damien was interested with purchasing the books.
However, Alan did not fulfill his promises to the parties, and they were enraged. In this
report, we will be discussing about whether a contract was form, the legal position and
remedies for all three parties and the pros and cons of dispute resolution.
Q1 Formation of contract and whether a contract was formed
A contract is a binding agreement between two or more parties[Sin15]. There are 4
essentials to form a contract, which are legal capacity to enter into a contract,
agreement, consideration and intention to create legal relations. A person who is 18
years old or above are able to make a contract. The terms of contract are decided by
parties, but the law might imply terms in contract. Agreement which refers to offer and
acceptance, offer is a willingness to agree on certain terms and acceptance has to
match the offer to successfully make a binding contract. Consideration is an exchange
of promises that has benefits and determents for both promisor and promisee. Intention
to create legal relations consists of readiness of party to accept the consequences of
entering agreement. In Bernard and Alan case, there isn’t any contract form as Bernard
had rejected the original offer from Alan by offering a lower price which means that there
isn’t any agreement form and Alan is able to sell the books to others. In Charleen and
Alan case, there is also no contract formed as Charleen had not reached the legal age
to form a legal contract. In Damien and Alan case, there is a contract formed as Damien is the first person to pass the money to Alan on 4th November 2015 and Alan had said to
pass him all the materials on 7th November 2015. Q2 Bernard v Alan and remedies
Bernard came across to Alan’s post and was interested in buying the materials from
him; he immediately replied saying that he is keen and made an offer of only $150 when
Alan was selling at $200. However, Alan rejected his offer by mentioning that he is
selling at $200 and there is already an offer. This issue will let us know whether is there
a contract formed between both of them and if Bernard is able to sue Alan.
An invitation to treat is just an invitation for parties to submit an offer to form a
contract[Tra17]. In Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash
Chemicals, the pharmacy was accused of “selling certain drugs without a pharmacist’s
supervision”. “Supply by retail sale” means sale by retail and includes exposure or
display as an invitation to treat [Sin16]. Alan posted his offer on Facebook to ask if
anyone is interested to buy the textbook from him, this is a form of invitation to treat.
A response to an offer which claims to be an acceptance but comprise additions,
limitations or other modifications is a rejection of the offer and forms a counter-offer [htt].
In this case, Bernard had lowered the offer to $150 so it means that he had rejected the
original offer and formed a counter-offer. Applying the case of Hyde v. Wrench (1840),
the defendant offered to sell his estate for £1,000 but the plaintiff reduces the price to
£950, however the defendant rejected the offer[Mic]. Therefore, the initial offer was
destroyed by the counter-offer. In the present case, it can be seen that a counter offer was made by Bernard when he expressed his interest in purchasing the books for $150,
so it is not possible for Bernard to accept the original offer later on.
Bernard then after decided to purchase the material from Alan, so he posted $200 to
Alan as he would be going overseas and could not meet up with Alan so he then
informed him to take note of it on 4th November. Alan then only passed his original
textbook only to Bernard on 7th November and stated that his notes are written on the
Since there is no contract made between Bernard and Alan, Bernard is unable to sue
Alan. However, Bernard could request Alan to return the money back to him while he
could return the textbook to Alan since he will be able to receive the same textbook from
Q3 Charleen v Alan and remedies
Charleen who was taking her GCE O-level that year saw her brother, Alan’s post about
selling his textbook on Facebook. She told Alan that she would buy his textbook for
$200 but he did not replied. She left the $200 on Alan’s table on 6 th November after
getting her pocket money. Through this issue, we will decide whether there was a
contract form between them.
As stated in the essay, Charleen was taking her GCE O-level that year, this showed that
Charleen was below 18 years old, so she was considered as a minor. A minor could
only be above 18 years old to make a legally binding contract. The law protects the
minors from entering into a legally binding contact as they might not contemplate the
result of their actions[Rob17]. Applying the case of Nash v Inman (1908), minors are only under a legal binding contract if the things are necessities for them. In this case,
Charleen was taking her o-level exam, even though she was interested in reading
business law, it was not a necessities as she does not need the book for her o-level
exam, so there is no contract form between them.
Alan smiled when Charleen told him that she will buy his textbook for $200 as he
thought that she was just joking about reading the textbook. Alan was not focusing when
Charleen asked if she could passed her the money on 6 th November 2015, so he
remained silence and just nodded. Applying the case of Felthouse v Bindley (1862),
Bindley was selling his horse and Felthouse offered to buy it for $30 and said that if he
no heard any replies from Bindley he will consider that the horse is sold to him, but
Bindley did not answer. In legal law, silence does not constitute acceptance so it means
that there is no agreement made between them. Same to Charleen and Alan as Alan
remained silence when Charleen said that she will buy the materials from him, therefore
there is no agreement made between them.
In Balfour v Balfour (1919), a husband agreed to send maintenance payments to his
wife as he is working overseas. Their relationship later soured and the husband stop
making the payments, so the wife have to enforce the agreement. However, since it is a
social and domestic agreement, it will not be legally bound [ela]. As stated that Charleen
and Alan are siblings, their agreement will not be bind.
In conclusion, there is no contract made between Charleen and Alan, as silence does
not constitute acceptance, a minor will not be legally bound by a contract and Social and domestic agreement will not be bind. However, Charleen could asked Alan to return
her the $200 she left on his table as he did not passed any textbook to Charleen.
Q4 Damien v Alan and remedies
Damien probably did not saw Alan’s post as he is not a friend on Alan’s facebook
account but Damien had heard about Alan’s offer from Bernard and also learns that Alan
had obtained a High Distinction for the unit so he is interested to purchase the materials
from Alan as he wants to obtain good grades for the module. Damien received the
hand-written notebook and the textbook which Alan bought from the bookstore on 7 th
November, in the end, Damien found out that the outcome was different from what Alan
had mentioned. Through this issue, we will decide whether there was a contract form
Misrepresentation is a false statement of fact made by one party to another party before
the end of the contract and has the result of inducing the other party to enter the
contract[Lawnd]. Applying the case of Edgington v Fitzmaurice (1885), the plaintiff
bought shares in the defendant company. The company lied that the shares sold was to
raise money to expand the company but in fact the company was having financial
difficulty and was going to use the money from selling the shares to clear the debts, the
court held that its was an misrepresentation as the company lied about expanding the
Therefore, Damien is able to sue Alan for misrepresentation as Alan had given a false
statement of fact and he will be able to claim back the remedies from Alan.
Q5 Alternative Dispute Resolution The various methods of dispute resolution are mediation, arbitration and litigation.
Mediation is a process for parties who have a dispute to reach a mutually acceptable
agreement without going to court. The mediators are a third person who helps parties to
negotiate and get to an agreement which both accepts[Res17]. The advantages of
Mediation are that it is very cheap compared to other resolution method, it is fast way
that disputes might be mediated within a few weeks, confidential, a win-win situation
and it is also less stressful. The disadvantages of mediation
Arbitration is a procedure in which a dispute is submitted to an impartial person for
decision, and the parties opt for a private dispute resolution procedure instead of going
to court[Wor]. The arbitrator decision is binding on all parties. The advantages of
arbitration are it can settle the disputes faster, confidential, it would be cheaper than
litigation and the parties are able to choose the arbitrator. The disadvantages of
arbitration are sometimes it can be more expensive than going to court and it is a winlose situation where they will decide who win and who lose.
Litigation is practices involved in resolving disputes in the court system. It is started by
the plaintiff filing a lawsuit in court. Litigation can come about in all kinds of cases, from
contested divorces, to eviction proceedings [leg17]. The advantages of litigation are that
it is final and the parties have to abide by the result after the courts had made a
decision, unless they could appeal to a higher court. The disadvantage are it would cost
a lot of money, it could take quite a long time as getting a date for trail could take many
years, it is not confidential and the parties are not able to choose the judge.
1814 words References
e-lawresources.co.uk Retrieved from:
Law Teacher The law essay Professionals Retrieved from:
Legal Resources (2017) Retrieved from:
Michael Lustig Retrieved from:
Resolution Institute (2017) Retrieved from: Singapore Academy of law (2015) Retrieved from:
Singapore Statutes Online (2016) Retrieved from:
Singapore Statutes Online (2017), Retrieved from:
TransLegal (2017) Retrieved from:
World intellectual property organization (2016) Retrieved from:
View Full Document
- Fall '16