Not all agreement is a legally enforceable contract, only certain time of agreement with co-hold to the rule of law of contract will become enforceable and such criteria have to be satisfied.
A contract to be legally binding or enforceable must include 4 essential elements as follow:
The relevant legal capacity to enter into a contract is the first element despite that there are other 3 existing elements; this is in relation to age and mental condition of the relevant contracting parties.
Agreement (Arising that an offer is made and accepted)
Consideration - an exchange of some benefit or something of value to the parties, for instance; there is monetary gains for products and services rendered.
The parties must have the intention to enter into a legal relationship which is the binding agreement.
The agreement will not stand when one or more components above are not in place.
Offer and Acceptance is generally used to decide whether a legally binding agreement exists between two parties in such traditional approach in contract law.
A contract exists when an offer is accepted (agreement to the terms in it) and is communicated to the offeror by the offeree.
In according to the case of Gunthing v Lynn (1831), the offeror offered to buy a horse “if it was lucky”. The court was held that the offer was unclear for it to stand.
Francis (as “offeror”) and Jim (as “offeree”) that Francis is willing to enter into an agreement to the terms that “he will buy the car on 20th January only if he has sufficient money” which is not a definite promise to be bound that the car will be purchased on 20th January and Jim (as “offeree”) could not accept the terms from Francis as offer was too vague.
While most offers are specially made to individuals, there also offers made to world at large or to a certain group of people.
For such cases, the contract will not be enforced as Jim did not accept the offer made by Francis. Therefore, Francis will not be successful this time as the required element relating is not fulfilled.
In additional, the revocation of the offer by offeror may be revoked before acceptance.
In the case of Routledge v Grant (1828) 4 BING 653. (Chandra, R. 2010) Jim has been offered by Francis on 16 January 2014 to keep that offer til 20 January 2014, it was held that the offer could be revoked as a promise to keep an offer available for the stipulated duration is usually not legal binding.
A reason for that is that there are essentially two offers for Jim. One is to sell the car and while the other is to keep that earlier offer available for the stipulated time for Francis.
With regards to Francis, even when Jim agrees that the offer be kept valid for a certain time, Jim was not given any consideration for it, therefore this does not constitute any contract being formed.
Francis mentions that he will buy the car if he has sufficient money, therefore an definite answer will only be given by 20 January. If the period from 4 days is given on one side to accept an offer, thus the other has 4 days to put an end to it. One party cannot be bound without the other.
Question 1b (i)
Under the contract of Sales of Good Act (SOGA) 1979 refers to Implied Terms dealing as a consumer. Determine as a consumer good cannot exclude four main protections Section 12 to 15 for buyers.
(S.12) The seller must have the right to sell the goods
(S.13) Goods sold by description must correspond to the description
(S.14) Goods must be of satisfactory quality
(S.15) Goods sold by sample, the goods must correspond to the sample in quality
If one of the four main protections is not met then, Sales of Goods Acts is valid. (The Sale of Goods Act, 1979)
It is valid that Fatimah (the “buyer”) can take the legal proceeding against Jim (the “Seller”) according to Sales of Good Act, under section 13 is breach.
Under the case Beale V Taylor (1967), the...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document