Offer is a highlight indication of the terms upon, like people are prepared to be bound; as well as, acceptance is receiving and agreeing the terms which have offered. Moreover, an offer is made when people is going to pay money for the item. In the case of Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) Ltd, the Boots Cash Chemists shop was organized on a fundamental of “self-service” which sells drugs and medicines; as well as, those items were showed on shelves and price are marked on each goods.
Some dangerous substances are contained in these odds, they have to sold them under the supervision of a registered pharmacist. Consumers are able to pay for the goods which they selected to cashier. However the Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain alleged that the drugs were being “sold” without the registered pharmacist service (Lamberts 2011, 240). The issue for that is whether there is an offer between customers and sellers before the consumer take goods to the cashier.
Don’t waste your time!
Order your assignment!
The decision is consumer had made an offer to purchase the goods, the cashier would accept the offer. The acceptance is also being effective when offered receives the offer. In the case of Wentworth v Fraser, Fraser is going to sell his houses to Wentworth, and give 14 days for him to accept the offer. Wentworth received offer and accepted it. Fraser received that before the letter of acceptance had been posted, another buyer sent a higher price offer to him and he wants to withdraw his offer to Wentworth (Lamberts 2011, 198).
The issue of law is whether there is an offer between Wentworth and Fraser before Framer’s attempt to withdraw it. The court found that the offer acceptance was effective when the acceptance was posted, as well as, this happened before the attempt to withdraw the offer. In terms of the Cargill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co, the company created a new product “smoke ball” which can prevent influenza and advertised it in the newspaper, and there is a reward of $100 for purchaser. Cargill got the reward but the company did not want to pay.
The legal issue is whether the offer of reward had been make between consumer and company as Cargill did not talk to company before catching influenza (Lamberts 2011, 165). In addition, the case of Brooking Ltd v Sthalwharenhandelsgesellschaft, a number of telexes were changed with each other, Business Law By threesomes acceptance effective. And the court said that the acceptance was effective when the telex was received in Vienna (Lamberts 2011, 159). Step 3 Since an agreement is Just legally enforceable if the parties is legally to be bound while the agreement is made.
A fair estimate for this circumstance is needed to enforce in Sally, Peter and Burt. According to the case of Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists, the court said the offer was effective since the customer had selected goods as marker price, because the goods in a shop is not to be construed for an offer, only there is a motivation for consumers to choose and offer to buy them. The sale contract is made Just at the next stage, when customer’s offer to purchase is accepted.
Hence, Sally sells his bike on the internet, as well as, Peter and Burt want to buy it, and they sent emails to Sally that they are interested in that bike and give a price; moreover, Sally received emails from them. Therefore, Peter and Burt had made an offer with Sally. On the other hand, the case of Wentworth v Fraser, the offer was effective when the letter of acceptance was posted. Burt wants to pay $5000 for that bike, but Sally prefer to receive $5500, and finally Burt said the eke is not worth that much and he is no longer interested.
That means Burt do not want to pay $5500 for bike and there is no acceptance between two parties. With regards to the case of Cargill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co, the offer was established even Cargill had never talk to the company, because he did the actions for purchasing and using the product, the offer was accepted at the time. The details on the internet is payment is upon delivery, and Peter also highlight that he needs Sally to arrange immediate delivery; Sally emailed Peter that she had organized immediate delivery, moment is due upon delivery as specified. Therefore, there is an acceptance between Sally and Peter.
Last but not least, the case Brooking Ltd v Sthalwharenhandelsgesellschaft considered that the acceptance was effective while the telex was received in Vienna. For some reasons, messages may not reach on time and two parties will be read at a later time. However the contract was made when and where the acceptance was received. The time of Sally sent email to Peter is before COB and email entered the Pewter’s inbox is 4:45 (1 5 minutes before COB). Thus, the acceptance is existed. Step 4 In conclusion, the agreement is legally to be enforceable between Sally and Peter; but there is no contract with Sally and Burt.
A contract will be formed with both Sally and Peter. Question 2: The legal issue of law is what terms are expressly agreed with regards to sale of the bicycle between two parties. Provide yardstick by which performance of the contract is measured. The wholly oral contracts terms are established by evidence from parties or witness, they can be classified into wholly written and exception. There are three main elements are not being part of the contract: Puffs, Opinions and Representations. Moreover, terms can be organized by conditions and warranties and there are express terms and implied terms as well.
In the case of LAG Throne ; Co Pity Ltd v Thomas Forthwith ; Sons, Throne bought 50 drums of oil from Thomas Forthwith and Thomas give an example to Throne. After sign an agreement and oil was delivered, Throne found that the oil is not as good as the provided sample, he claimed that it should have been the same. The issue is whether there is an agreement that the sale was established related to the sample. The court found that there is no between two parties (Lamberts 011, 214). The case of Alley v Marlborough Court, Alley and his wife went to a hotel, after paying in advance and signing the register, they went to their rooms.
There is a saying on the wall that “The proprietors will not hold themselves responsible for articles lost or stolen unless hander to the office for safe custody. ” Then, they did not lock the door and his wife lost her furs. Alley sued the hotel to get the loss. The legal issue is whether the notice is effective and the decision is the notice is not a term of the contract (Lamberts 2011, 233). The case of Camel cigarettes, the company advertised that “blow in her face and she will follow anywhere”. A customer bought that and tried to do, but he failed.
He sued the company as well. The issue is whether there is a contract between two parties, and the court said the contract is not legally to be bound. In the case of secondhand car, buyer wanted to purchase a good car and seller recommended a car, and seller said this is the best car in my market, you will regret if you miss it. After buying the car, buyer found the car is not as good as the seller said, he wanted to return it back. The issue is whether the contract was established in both two parties and the decision is there is no contract between them.
In terms of Associated Newspapers v Banc’s, Banc’s is a cartoonist and he agreed to draw for Associated Newspapers. Company agreed to pay him money and publish the drawing on the front page. After 3 weeks, Bannock’s drawing was on the page 3. Banc’s wanted to sue the company. The issue is does the term is important to put on the first page, the court said the terms was significant (Lamberts 2011, 147). The case for Betting v Gee shows that Betting is a singer and she made a contract with Gee that she will sing and arrive there six days before the first engagement for rehearsals. However, she did not go early because of ill.
Gee wanted to terminate. The issue is whether she attend to rehearsals is a condition, and court found the term was a warranty (Lamberts 2011, 155) In the case of Lagrange v F Cura??ao, Cura??ao agreed to sell a cigarette vending machine to Lagrange. Cura??ao said there is no implied warranties or conditions from the agreement and Lagrange signed it without reading. After delivery, the machine did not work. Cura??ao argued with him. The issue is whether there is a contract between two parties and decision is contract is effective (Lamberts 2011, 213). Terms are expressly agreed when they have been identified in writing or oral. Comment. Peter signed the purchase agreement and bayed $4000 for the bike, therefore they had made a contract. Sally said that the bike is a Joy to ride, however Peter found the bike was not Joy to ride. According to the case of Camel cigarette, the court said the advertisement is puff and puff is not a term; Sally also said this model of bike is in short supply on the secondhand business, but Peter found many of the name bikes sell in his friend’s university; according to the secondhand car, the decision is the seller said were all in his view, it is an opinion, opinion is not a term as well.
Sally responded to Peter that “It also includes the refurbishment of the gears and replacement of any damaged spokes”, but it did show in the document and Peter found gear had not been sure and it was broken after 6 weeks. The document said “restored and refurbished with new trees and a new chain” but whilst the bike frame and spokes had been restored and refurbished. In the case of Newspaper, the cession is that put the drawing on the first page is a condition; hence, those are conditions. Peter found color is not dashing green, it actually more of a murky greenish brown.
The decision of Betting v Gee is coming for rehearsals is a warranty, according to that case, the color of bike is a warranty. The document said any guarantee to goods is limited to the first 30 days, but the bicycle was broken after 6 weeks which is more than days. According to the case of f Lagrange v F Cura??ao, the court said the contract is effective even Lagrange did not read the agreement. Therefore, while Peter has signed the document, the contract was made in both two parties.
Step 4 In conclusion, Peter cannot ask help from Sally because the contract had made when Peter signed the document. The express term is the document which they made include additional clause; the condition is whilst the bike frame and spokes had been restored and refurbished, as well as gears were not sure; the warranty is the color of the bicycle. Part B Judges are able to look outside an Act of Parliament for assistance in interpreting legislation. With the world develop in an amazing speed, a variety of cases are deed to solve in the court.