Commercial Law Assignment.docx - Ngan Sihui CT 0290813 FT DipAcct 29 Commercial Law Alan Bernard Charleen Damien Issues In this case of Alan Bernard

Commercial Law Assignment.docx - Ngan Sihui CT 0290813 FT...

This preview shows page 1 - 3 out of 5 pages.

Ngan SihuiCT 0290813FT DipAcct 29Commercial LawAlan, Bernard, Charleen & DamienIssuesIn this case of Alan, Bernard, Charleen and Damien, Alan has opened an invitationby letting others know that his textbook and notes are up on a sale as he did notneed them anymore with a specific price. This invitation can be accepted by anyoneaccording to a case that is similar, Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co (1893)[ CITATION Lor12 \l 1033 ]. In order for a contract to be made, the acceptance mustmatch the offer exactly and both the Offeror and Offeree must accept all the terms ofthe offer. Also, acceptance has to be communicated with the way that the offeror hasstated. Alan did not state the method of communication when he posted that histextbook and notes are up for a sale which was on the 1stof November 2015.Alan v BernardBernard saw Alan’s post on Facebook on the 2ndof November 2015 and was keen tobuy the textbook and the notes, however, at a cheaper price. At this moment,Bernard has offered Alan a counter offer. However, Alan did not give any replies toBernard until the 3rdof November 2015. The reply that Alan gave to Bernard was toemphasize that the selling price of the textbook and notes is not $150 as it wasclearly stated that the selling price will be $200. Alan has also included in his reply toBernard that there was an offer made by another party when emphasizing the sellingprice. Therefore, there was no contract made because Alan has rejected Bernard’soffer by informing Bernard that the textbook and notes are for sale for $200 andthere was another offer already. Even though Bernard has decided to buy Alan’stextbook and notes for $200 on the night of 3rdof November 2015 and had preparedthe money to give it to Alan, there was no contract made as Alan was not informedabout the acceptance. According to a similar case, Hyde v. Wrench(1840), theinitial offer was terminated by the counter offer and hence, no contract was made[ CITATION Jam14 \l 1033 ]. This will bring us to our main point that Bernard wouldnot be able to sue Alan if he had any intentions to as they are not legally bound byany contracts.Alan v CharleenAlan and Charleen are siblings where by Charleen is Alan’s younger sister. Charleenis considered a minor as she was only taking GCE ‘O’ levels that year. On 2ndofNovember, in the morning, Charleen told Alan that she will buy his textbook andnotes for $200 when he was still in bed. Even though Alan smiled, it does notrepresent his consent nor acceptance. Alan was half-asleep throughout the wholetime when Charleen went to him to ask about buying the textbook and notes.Charleen mentioned that she will only be able to pay Alan on the 6thof Novemberwhich is not requested by Alan and not according to Alan’s terms. This is an exampleof unqualified acceptance. Charleen and Alan are also not legally bound by any
Background image
contracts as they are related as family members. Domestic agreements are notbound by a contract unless with the intention to create legal relations. According to a
Background image
Image of page 3

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture