Eunice advertised to sell her home theatre system for $2,000.00. She described her system and its component parts in great detail.
Sean came to Eunice's home to look at the system. He asked a few questions about the technical specifications of the system, and if Eunice would accept cash payment, or required bank transfer of funds to close the deal. Eunice said she would accept payment by either cash or bank transfer of funds. Peter said he would come by the next day.
Later in the day, another person, Samuel, came to her house. He saw her system, and tested it. Samuel then paid her cash without bargaining on the spot and took the system. Sean is upset with Eunice. He argues that Eunice ought to have waited for him to test the system the next day since she allowed him to attend the next day. He is of the opinion that she had no right to sell the system to Samuel.
Please explain your answers to the questions below by applying your knowledge of the Law of Contract to the facts given and state how you interpret the facts.
a. Please state whether the advertisement that Eunice had put up was an offer or an invitation to treat, and explain your answer.
In contract law, there is a difference between an offer and invitation to treat. Section 5 provides... View the full answer