Application of Legal Principles in Nulla Nulla Shire Council's Transactions

1
The Application of Legal Principles in the Issues Affecting Nulla Nulla Shire Council’s
Transactions
Student Name
Institutional Affiliation

2
Transaction 1
The issues in the case of Nulla Nulla Shire Council, Ezy-Kleen, and Ace Cleaning services
are:
 Was the contract formed between the Council and Ezy-Kleen valid or void?
 Does the incorrect dating of the stamp amount to a mistake?
 Was there a breach of contract by Nulla Nulla to Ace?
 Does Ace deserve payment of damages?
Certain principles govern the law of contract:
Australian Contract Law (Common law) has six legal principles that render a contract valid1.
 Agreement (offer & acceptance)
 Capacity
 Consideration
 Genuine consent
 Intention
 Legality
The doctrine of equity
The case of Tweddle v Atkinson
Several aspects are considered before a contract is rendered valid, void or voidable. The first
part involves determining if a valid contract was formed between the Council and Ezy-Kleen.
Firstly, the court will majorly look if there was a legal agreement formed concerning the
Council and Ezy-Kleen. Lucy (the Council’s maintenance manager) put a call to all the
interested companies to tender for service provision. The call expanses to an invitation to
treat; the companies are being invited to make offers. The tenders submitted by Ace and Ezy-
Kleen amounted to offers; the Council was supposed to look at the best offer and award a
1 Ewan McKendrick, and Qiao Liu. Contract Law: Australian Edition. (Macmillan International Higher
Education, 2015).

3
tender.2 Ezy-Kleen made an offer which the Council accepted based on what was tabled
before them. The acceptance was done through awarding of a bid; the Council did not use
illegal or unacceptable ways to grant the bid neither did Ezy-Kleen use unlawful means to
acquire it; the contract is valid under common law.
The wrong stamping would amount to a mistake if it were done by the Council’s staff. The
error is said to be a mistake of fact; this is a mistake whereby both parties are mistaken about
a factual matter leading to the formation of the contract3. Ace submitted their offer in due
time, but their letter was wrongly dated thereby making it a late offer. However, that was a
mistake done by the Council and Ace has the right to take action against the Council.4 The
error of fact, if proven to be so, would render the contract between the Council and Ezy-
Kleen void.
Violation of contract emerges when one party to the contract breaches (fails to perform) its
obligations to the agreement.5 Ace threatens to take legal action for breach of contract
because their offer was wrongly dated. That was a mistake done by the Council, but does it
amount toa breach of contract? A violation is only present between parties to a contract, and
the Council had the option to reject Ace’s offer.6 What was merely tabled by the Council to
Ace was an invitation to treat; the tender submitted by Ace was the offer itself. If the Council
chooses to reject the offer, then they cannot be prosecuted for breach of contract. The
doctrine of privity of contract as stated in the case of Tweddle v Atkinson says that only a
party to a contract can sombody to court or be charged. There was no breach under common
law7.
2 "Aus Contract Law." (Australiancontractlaw.Com, 2019 )
<https://www.australiancontractlaw.com/contractlaw/formation.html.>
3 Edwin Peel. Treitel on the Law of Contract. Vol. 414. London: (Sweet & Maxwell, 2015.)
4 Sale of Goods Act
5 Jay Young, Mediator and Arbitrator, and Mediator and Arbitrator Jay Young. "The Elements for a Claim of
Breach of Contract." (Jay Young, Mediator and Arbitrator, 2015), < http://nevadalaw.info/the-elements-for-a-
claim-of-breach-of-contract/.>
6 Australian Consumer Law Act
7 Tweddle v Atkinson [1861] EWHC QB J57, (1861) 1 B&S 393, 121 ER 762