Case Study, Susan v The House of Lewis
Outlined below is a neutral perspective on a civil law scenario. The text will include an unbiased opinion on whether Susan had any form of contract with House of Lewis Stores LTD and a personal opinion in relation to a compensation claim. Contract law and a personal interpretation will also be discussed.
The presence of a contract is only determined when a certain criteria is met, this is what known as the elements of a contract, these are as follows; The first of these is the offer, there has to be willingness to adhere to a set of terms and conditions with the understanding that, should the offer be accepted they will be bound by contract. The second is acceptance of that offer; the common misconception with this is that it must be in writing however, that is not the case it can be verbal as well. Providing that the terms are a direct mirror image of the offer, then the acceptance is an unconditional agreement to all terms and the acceptance that they will then be entered in to a contract. If a counter offer is made then this diminishes all aspects of the original contract, meaning that you cannot make a counter offer and then decide to revert back to the first offer. Finally, if there is a lack of clarification in the initial offer then before accepting it there will be a request for information.
In relation to the case Susan v House of Lewis Stores PLC, it can be argued that the taking of the ticket at the entrance to the car-park is acceptance of the terms put forward on the sign. The fact that Susan did not see the signs does not void any of the information on them, the contractors carrying out the work did everything in their power to ensure that visitors were aware of the works being carried out and that vehicles were parked at the owner’s risk. However as a counter argument the scenario states that these signs were at every exit point at which time it would have been too late for Susan to see.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document