Introduction
The common rules of offer and acceptance need to be considered in determining if Gordon formed a contract with Ritebuild Ltd before they purported to withdraw their offer.
Misrepresentation
If it is established that a misrepresentation has been made by Anderson’s sales representative, Gordon will be advised of a potential remedy under the Misrepresentation Act 1967
Contract Formation
Where a person invites for a particular project, the general rule is that the invitation to tender is an invitation to treat (Spencer v Harding 1870 ). An invitation to treat is simply an expression of willingness to enter into negotiations which, it is hoped, will lead to the conclusion of a contract at a later date. The offer is made by the person who submits the tender and the acceptance is made when the person inviting the tenders accepts one of them. An offer is an expression of willingness to be bound on acceptance of that offer on certain terms. Gordon invites various local builders to tender for the work to be done. Ritebuild Ltd response to an invitation to tender is not the acceptance of an offer but is an offer following an invitation to treat which can then be accepted or rejected by Gordon. In order to create a binding contract, the parties must express their agreement in a form which is sufficiently certain for the courts to enforce. Ritebuild Ltd terms are certain and there is an expression of willingness to be bound.
In order to have an enforceable contract there must be an offer which is accepted prior to any revocation of that offer. Acceptance is a final and unqualified assent to the terms of an offer. Acceptance must be effectively communicated to the offeror unless the need for communication has been waived, as in...
... middle of paper ...
...i-Nosh” software. At common law the courts have insisted upon precise restitution, but the harshness of this rule is mitigated by the intervention of equity. In equity a party who can make substantial, but not precise, restitution can rescind the contract if he returns the subject matter of the contract in its altered form and gives an account of any profits made through his use of the product together with an allowance for any deterioration in the product (Erlanger v New Sombrero Phosphate Co. 1878 ). Gordon cannot return the use that he has made of “Easi-Nosh” but he can make a money payment to Anderson Computers Ltd which will represent the use he has made of “Easi-Nosh” and the contract can be set aside.
With regard to fraudulent misrepresentation, the innocent party can recover damages whether or not they rescind the contract under the tort of deceit. Simila
Whether oral or written, the contract must manifest a mutual intent to be bound expressed in a manner capable of being understood, and include a definite offer, unconditional acceptance and consideration.” (Express Contract 2016) The above definition is a much clearer explanation with key elements outlined; 1. mutual intent, 2, expressed in a manner capable of being understood, 3. definite offer, 4. unconditional acceptance and 5. Consideration.
"A contract is a legally enforceable promise or set of promises. In other words, when promises have the status of contract, the contracting party harmed by a breach of the contract is entitled to obtain legal remedies against the breaching party" (Mallor et al., 2015, p. 320)
This case comes in market in May 8, 2002. This case is based on mail fraud in Florida District court. Kevin Gray is a businessman.
Using the 4 step process, consider whether the element of agreement required for the formation of legally enforceable contract has been satisfied in the above scenario involving Isabella and Sienna.
As mentioned earlier, there are certain requirements which must be met for a contract to be valid; requirements needed include agreement, consideration, contractual capacity and legality. For an agreement to be valid there must be an offer and acceptance present. In other words, there must be an intent known and understood for the contact to have an agreement. With that being said, there is no
It is known that the advisee will be acting upon the advice for that purpose without independent inquiry
A misrepresentation is a false statement of fact, made knowingly or otherwise, which induces the representee to enter into the contract. For the statement to be proven to be a misrepresentation, the plaintiff must prove that the statement is false and also that they would not have entered into the contract had they been aware of its falsity. If proven to be a misrepresentation, the contract may become void. The plaintiff then has the option to rescind the contract or to refuse to perform their part of the contract, and they may also be entitled to receive damages.
The contract is made for a supplier of goods and services, or sale or grant the interest of land rights;
benefited from purchase, while the customer was given a false promise. In The Wife Of
An invitation to treat made by one party to another is not an offer. An invitation to treat is made at a preliminary stage in the making of an agreement, where one party seeks to ascertain whether the other would be willing to enter into a contract and, if so, upon what terms. To distinguish between an offer and an invitation to treat it is necessary to look at the intention of the person making it. It is not an offer unless it was made with the intention that it should be binding as soon as the person to whom it was addressed communicates hi assent. Some examples of invitations to treat are:
There are legislation which protects consumer from unfair selling from business. The legislation protects consumers from misleading description of products which induced them to buy the product or faulty products.
Misrepresentation – giving a false statement to the other party with the intentions to benefit or to exploit the other party than the law can end the contract in that case.
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...
“Where a person has entered into a contract after a misrepresentation has been made to him by another party thereto and as a result thereof he has suffered loss, then, if the person making the misrepresentation would be liable to damages in respect thereof had the misrepresentation been made fraudulently, that person shall be so liable notwithstanding that the misrepresentation was not made fraudulently, unless he proves that he had reasonable ground to believe and did believe up to the time the contract was made the facts represented were true.”
Where there has been a fraudulent misrepresentation, the innocent party is entitled to rescind the contract and claim damages as observed in the cases of Doyle v Olby and Smith New Court Securities v Scrimgeour Vickers