The issue in consideration is that on one hand both Charlie

1 A) The issue in consideration is that on one hand both Charlie and Ali used thier own
solicitors to negotiate the terms of written agreement between Chalie and Ali and on the other
hand Charlie breached the contract which was initially not intended to be legally binding as
they are siblings.
B) The relevant legal rules to such problems are:
Firstly, when the both the parties agree to the terms in documents and has the intention of
binding , and also propose that the terms be incorporated into fuller more precise documents
rather than being vague and should not be different in effect- these terms are binding.
Secondly, when both the parties agree to the terms in the documents and has the intention of
binding but makes one or two terms conditional depending upon the situation that arises from
the execution of the contract- these terms are binding.
Thirdly, when the parties in agreement does not intend to be legally binding until the formal
execution of the contract- these terms are not legally binding.
C) The main cases related to this problem is that of the Mr. Balfour and Mrs. Balfour (1919),
in which the the husband promised to pay his wife allowance when he is abroad. Now, they
failed to keep thier marraige and so was the allowance from Mr. Balfour end. The wife sued
and later it was found that the marraige was not intended to be legally binding. The court also
found that the wife did not pay heed to the husband promise.
D) No Ali would lose the case, as intention is initial stage of contract. Even if the elements of
offer, acceptance and consideration are present in the contract but on the other hand the
parties did not had the intention to bind together with the agreement such agreement is not
enforceable by law because there was no intention of bindings with this contract.

2 A) The issue in consideration here is that whether the agreement between the police sergent
and Nick who organized the event were intended to bind legally. Secondly is there any
written or partly written and partly verbal agreement between the two parties as such
agreements is binding. If the agreement is verbal what about the evidence that has seen and
heard about the agreement.
B) The relevant rules that relates to this problem is that in Australia some contracts are
required to be in writing as per the statute such as insurance contracts, credit contracts etc.
whereas for commercial agreements it is important to consider verbal agreements (partly
verbal and partly written agreements) can be upheld as legally binding contracts, but there
has been numerous scenarios wherein Supreme court, NSW in Australia has given legal
effect to the verbal agreement.
C) The main case related to this problem is that of the Alex and Bob bookstore transaction
wherein the law clearly distinguishes between the offer and the treat. As per the the contract
law the invitation to treat is not an offer because it is not in a definate form to be accepted as
in a identical terms. The similar case can be cited with the example of Carlill vs Carbolic
Smoke Co. (1893)
D) Yes, if the police department sues Nick they would definately win the case on the basis of
acceptance of Nick on an concrete offer from the police department to pay them the amount
of $1000.
3 A) The issue in consideration here is that whether the agreement between Mike and Helen
were intended to be legally binding for both the parties for the payment of outstanding
amount.