Case Study on Contract Law

2381 Words5 Pages

The issue in this case is whether there is a legally binding contract between Roland and Bernie. The things that needs to be considered is whether there is an agreement between Roland and Bernie. If there is an offer and acceptance, then there is an existence of agreement. According to Section 2(a) of the Contract Act 1950, offer can be defines as when one person implies his/her willingness to another in order to acquire their consent. (Abdullah et al, 2011) The person who make the offer is known as ‘offeror’ or ‘promisor’. (Lee and Detta, 2009) An offer can be made in the method of orally, by conduct, writing or by the mixture of these forms. An offer must require an effective communication with offeree. The formation of contract when offeree accepted the proposal. (Dass, 2005) An invitation to treat is an invitation to form a proposal, and thus there is no legal consequences. (Nabi Baksh and Arjunan, 2005) An offer must be differentiated from an invitation to treat. (Lee and Detta, 2009) In this question, Roland was making an invitation to treat when he displayed the price tag on the car vehicle. Actually, he is inviting customers to form an offer to him. When the customers consent the price and discussed with Roland, both of them actually are making the offer. In this situation, it is depends on whether Roland want accept or not. Thus, Bernie is making an offer when she consent to buy the car stated as RM10 000. Bernie implies her willingness to buy the car marked RM10 000 with the expectation of Roland will sell the car to her at this price. Obviously, Bernie is the offeror. A contract will come into being when the people who forms the invitation treat accepts the offer of the customer, for instance Roland accept the offe... ... middle of paper ... ...each and the employee left in a timely manner. (Aminuddin, 2013) In this case, Saito Sdn. Bhd. unilaterally terminated the benefits enjoyed by Roslan. When Roslan believes that her employer is accused of breaching an implied term of the employee’s contract of the employment as her employer had removed the benefits from her and generally it clear that the employee is no longer important. Therefore, constructive dismissal occurred. In this situation, Roslan was advised that make a formal complaint to her employer requesting that the problem be rectified. For instance, Roslan should write a formal letter to her employer asking for the reinstating the previously benefits. If no satisfactory rectification is made, the employee can walk off the job. The law of constructive dismissal requires the employee to leave in a timely manner. She must not delay too long.

More about Case Study on Contract Law

Open Document