Law question Essay

Ali had an antique minibike which he clear-cut to sell. He parked the motorbike on his front lawn with a sign For sale- RM20,000. Ah Chong, who saw the sign, said to Ali that he would be prepared to buy the motorbike for RM15,000. Ali replied that the harm is likewise low and suggested RM18,000. Ah Chong responded by asking if Ali would be prepared to take aim payment of the RM18,000 in three monthly instalments of RM6,000 each. Ali replied that he would non. Ali then added, Anyway I am no agelong interested in selling the motorbike to you. At that precise s Ali spoke these words, a helicopter flew low overhead and drowned let out his words. Ali did not bother to repeat what he had just said and was leaving when Ah Chong quickly agreed to the RM18,000 suggested earlier by Ali. Discuss whether there is a stuff between 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 kindred to discuss the question supra 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 talk information to bargain means a someone inviting others to make an cleft in order to pass water a binding contract. An example 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 event of invitation to treat was discussed in the case of Fisher v Bell1961 1 QB 394 by the English Court of good luck charm It is perfectly clear that according 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 turn for sale the turn outance of which constitutes a contract. 1. An lead c an 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 stated in Section 2(a) Contracts achievement 1950, when one person signifies to another his willingness to do or abstain from doing anything, 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 make 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 reach out as he would be PREPARED to buy the motorbike for RM15,000.However, a counter bid was make by Ali when instead of accepting or rejecting Ah Chongs suggest, 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 situation unless an acceptance i s 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 condition precedent to acceptance. There was famous case cognise as 2Hyde v. Wrench, 1840 EWHC Ch J90 where Wrench (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 turn offered to purchase the property for 950 pounds and Wrench replied that he would tip over the offer and give an answer indoors approximately two weeks. Wrench ultimately rejected the offer and the plaintiff immediately replied that he accepted Wrenchs earlier offer to sell the satisfying estate for 1000 pounds. Wrench ref apply 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 counte roffer, does the original offer remain open? 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 invigorate it. So in another words, the parties did not form a binding contract. Then we proceed to the contiguous part where Ah Chong made a mere enquiry 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 bring downd at any time before the conference of its acceptance is complete as against the proposer, but not afterwards. This particular case 33ROUTLEDGE V GRANT (1828) 4 BING 653 is another example of revocation of an offer pass wrote to Routledge offering to purchase the lease of his house. The offer was to remain open for six weeks. Grant then changed his beware about purchasing the lease and, within the six weeks, withdrew his offer.After Routledge had real Grants garner withdrawing the offer, he wrote back to Grant, within the six weeks, accepting Grants offer. The issue before the appeal was whether Grant could withdraw his offer within the six week period or whether he was squinch 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.One 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 Van Tienhoven (1880) LR 5 CPD 344. In this case, Van Tienhoven offered to sell goods to Byrne by earn dated 1 October. On 8 October, prior to acceptance, Van Tienhoven posted a earn 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 must be communicated. Where post is use d 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 simulated 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.Importance 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.