Law question Essay Example for Free

Law question EssayAli had an antique motorbike which he decided to sell. He put the motorbike on his front lawn with a sign For sale- RM20,000. Ah Chong, who saw the sign, express to Ali that he would be fain to bribe the motorbike for RM15,000. Ali replied that the price is too low and suggested RM18,000. Ah Chong responded by asking if Ali would be prepared to birth payment of the RM18,000 in three monthly instalments of RM6,000 each. Ali replied that he would not. Ali then added, Anyway I am no longer interested in selling the motorbike to you. At that precise moment Ali spoke these deli precise, a helicopter flew low hit and drowned out his words. Ali did not b different to repeat what he had just verbalize and was leaving when Ah Chong quickly agreed to the RM18,000 suggested earlier by Ali. Discuss whether there is a produce amid Ali and Ah Chong. Explain whether your answer would be different if the helicopter flying overhead had not drowned out Alis words and Ah Chong heard what was said? Assignment Answer In this assignment, I would like to discuss the question preceding(prenominal) part by part.First of all, from the sentence , He parked the motorbike on his front lawn with a sign For sale- RM20,000, it is said that there was an invitation to trade. Invitation to treat or simply speaking in mastermindation to bargain center a person inviting others to practice an tolerate in order to create a binding contract. An recitation of invitation to treat is found in window shop displays and product advertisement. . In another words it is a special expression showing a persons willingness to negotiate.The issue of invitation to treat was discussed in the exemplar of Fisher v Bell1961 1 QB 394 by the English Court of Appeal It is perfectly clear that consort to the ordinary law of contract the display of an article with a price on it in a shop window is merely an invitation to treat. It is in no sense an offer for sale the bridal of wh ich constitutes a contract. 1. An offer can be seen from the prescribed text, Ah Chong, who saw the sign, said to Ali that he would be prepared to buy the motorbike for RM15,000. It is state in atom 2(a) Contracts Act 1950, when one person signifies to another his willingness to do or abstain from doing eitherthing, with a view to obtaining the assent of that other to the act or abstinence, he is said to make a proposal. and Section 2(b) Contracts Act 1950,when the person to whom the proposal is made signifies his assent thereto, the proposal is said to be accepted a proposal, when accepted, becomes a promise. . Both laws were applied when Ah Chong has shown his willingness to make an offer as he would be PREPARED to buy the motorbike for RM15,000.However, a replica offer was made by Ali when instead of judge or rejecting Ah Chongs offer, Ali made another offer Ali replied that the price is too low and suggested RM18,000. Alis offer refers to a counter offer. In this situatio n unless an acceptance is rendered, there is no binding contract between A and B. This situation is stated in Section 6(c) Contracts Act 1950- by the failure of the acceptor to fulfill a trail precedent to acceptance. There was famous case known as 2Hyde v. work, 1840 EWHC Ch J90 where twirl (D) offered to sell his estate to Hyde for 1200 pounds and Hyde (P) declined.Wrench then made a final offer to sell the farm for 1000 pounds. Hyde in incline offered to purchase the property for 950 pounds and Wrench replied that he would consider the offer and give an answer within roughly two weeks. Wrench ultimately rejected the offer and the plaintiff immediately replied that he accepted Wrenchs earlier offer to sell the real estate for 1000 pounds. Wrench refused and Hyde sued for breach of contract and sought specific performance, contending that Wenchs offer had not been withdrawn prior to acceptance.The question or issue here is if one party makes an offer and the offeree makes a c ounteroffer, does the authoritative offer bide cave in? Answer is No because a counteroffer negates the original offer. By making a counteroffer, the plaintiff rejected the original offer and he was not entitled to revive it. So in another words, the parties did not form a binding contract. Then we proceed to the next part where Ah Chong made a mere question to Ali by asking if Ali would be prepared to accept payment of thr RM18,000 in three monthly instalments of RM6,000 each. Then, Ali replied that he would not.On top of that, Ali added that he is no longer interested in selling the motorbike to Ah Chong. Section 5(1) Contract Acts 1950 A proposal may be revoked at any condemnation before the parley of its acceptance is complete as against the proposer, further not afterwards. This particular case 33ROUTLEDGE V GRANT (1828) 4 BING 653 is another example of abrogation of an offer Grant wrote to Routledge offering to purchase the lease of his house. The offer was to remain open for half-dozensome weeks. Grant then changed his mind about purchasing the lease and, within the six weeks, withdrew his offer.After Routledge had received Grants letter withdrawing the offer, he wrote support to Grant, within the six weeks, judge Grants offer. The issue before the court was whether Grant could withdraw his offer within the six week period or whether he was bound contractually given that Routledge had accepted the offer within the timescale. The court held the offer could be withdrawn within the six week period without incurring any liability if one party has six weeks to accept an offer, the other has six weeks to put an end to it. adept party cannot be bound without the other. The case and scenario above convey an useful reminder that until such time as an offer is accepted, the offeror is free to revoke it, even if they have given the recipient a period of time to consider it. When Ali spoke I am no longer interested in selling the motorbike to you. a helicopter flew and drowned his words. And yet, Ali did not bother to repeat what he just said and was leaving when Ah Chong quickly agreed to the RM18,000 suggested earlier by Ali.In this particular moment, Ali rejected Ah Chongs offer but according to Section 6(a) Contracts Act 1950- by the communication of notice of revocation by the proposer to the other party. It states that revocation os not effective until it is received, communicated. In fact, Ali himself reluctant to repeat what he said which is very important and vital in that situation. Here is one similar case, 4Byrne v wagon train Tienhoven (1880) LR 5 CPD 344. In this case, Van Tienhoven offered to sell goods to Byrne by letter dated 1 October. On 8 October, prior to acceptance, Van Tienhoven posted a letter revoking the offer.This letter was received by Byrne on 20 October. In the meantime, on 11 October Byrne received the letter and dispatched an acceptance. Was there a contract? To be effective revocation moldine ss be communicated. Where post is used for acceptance, acceptance occurs when and where sent. However, this rule does not apply in relation to revocation of offers thus, if post is used for revocation, communication is only effective if and when it is received by the offeree. As this occurred after acceptance there was a contract formed in this case. An offer was containing a price escalation clause.A counter offer was then made without this clause it contained a detachable receipt which the company sent back with a notation that they assumed it was on their terms. Thus, the intended message was failed to be received by Ah Chong, the offer has not been revocated. There is a contract between Ali and Ah Chong in this scenario. Section 6(a) Contracts Act 1950 obviously stated revocation must be actually communicated to the offeree before the offer can be treated as effectively revoked. Besides, Section 4(1) Contracts Act 1950- The communication of a proposal is complete when it comes to the knowledge of the person to whom it is made. magnificence of conveying message has been shown when either offering or revocating an offer. On the other hand, if the helicopter flying overhead had not drowned out Alis words and Ah Chong heard what was said, outcomes definitely would be different. As was mentioned earlier, if the intended message was communicated or received by Ah Chong, revocation of the offer will succeed. In conclusion, communication is very crucial when conducting contracts or offerings as the outcomes and consequences can differ easily.