Business Law: Agreement, Offer, Acceptance, and Breach of Contract

This document discusses the main topics of agreement, offer, acceptance, and breach of contract in business law. It analyzes a case scenario involving Ciera, Tom, and Los Property Repairs, providing advice on breach of contract and the refusal to buy a property. The document also explains the rules of law related to contract and agreement, and provides an analysis and conclusion based on these rules.

Business Law

In this respective file the main topic which will be reflected will be connected with
agreement, offer, acceptance and breach of contract. The case scenario is all connected with
Ciera, Tom and Los Property Repairs. Here, the main focus will be related with giving the
suitable advice to Ciera that where she is in breach of contract or not and can Tom refuse to buy
the property or not on which he had already deposited the sum of £200,000.
Issue: The case is connected with Ciera and Tom where Ciera advertise the property in
the newspaper to sale it on which tom showed his willingness to have a visit at the property. It is
the case which is quite similar with Partridge v Crittenden1 (1968). Both, Tom v Ciera and case
between Partridge v Crittenden1 (1968) has one similarity which is invitation to treat. Here, offer
was not made in any of the case1. But, after having an overview of the property Tom raise the
question about the damage rooftop. It was the reason due to which offer was made by Ciera to
Tom to purchase the property at a price of £380,000.
Once the contract was signed between both Ciera and Tom, Ciera was the one who
contact Los Property Repair Ltd. Here, agreement was done between both the party to compete
the project within the month at a price of £5000. But, looking at the situation of the case addition
£5000 was demanded after certain period of time by Los Property Repair Ltd on which Ciera
agreed. Also, when work was completed, Ciera denied to pay more than £5000. This was the
situation of breach of contract which is needed to have an overview in detail. Healy v. Brewster
is the case which has the similarity with this case as in this case as well certain terms and
condition where required to be modified just because of the requirement2. In this case,
modification was required to complete the terms and condition of on time and even it was
necessary in the case between Ciera and Los property to bring the modification in the terms and
condition to complete the work.
Rules of law: By Looking at the situation of the case, it can be clearly understood that
whole of the case is connected with the legal binding terms and condition. To understand about
the case in detail, it is necessary to have complete knowledge about the legal laws and
regulations related to agreement, binding contract, breach of contract as well as offers and
counter offer.
1 (Png, 2017)
2 (Burns, Mullet and Bryant, 2016)

Agreement: It is the law which explains about the legal relationship between two or more
than two parties whenever they enter into the contract. It is done just for the purpose of
completing any of the specific transactions within the given time period.
Binding Contract: The term binding offer clearly says that any of the contract which has
been formed with the intention of legal terms and condition. It is needed to understand that
contract can become valid only in the situation where it is legally binding with the terms and
condition of law.
Offer: It is the main thing Whenever any of the party enters into the contract then it is
necessary that first party must give the offer to second party. Then, it is the choice of second
party that whether they want to go for further proceeding or not. The landmark case which can
help to understand the concept is between Hyde v Wrench 5 (1840) which simply explains that
offer is required to be made for entering into any of the contract3.
Consideration: Once, both of the party accept the terms and condition then it is
necessary that something should be given in return. For example: if there is the contract between
two parties related to employment law then one party will have to give money and another one is
required to work for them to accomplish the goals of an organisation. Re McArdle (1951) Ch
669, is one of the landmark case which discusses that in any of the situation past consideration
will not be consideration in any of the contract.
Breach of Contract: It is the condition where any one of the party breach the term and
condition of agreement. In this condition, innocent party gets the opportunity to file the case
against the defaulter party. It comes under the civil wrong where court has to interfere to sort out
the problem. This can occur in the situation where work is not completed on time, one fails to do,
or even didn't conducted as per the requirement of agreement. Hadley v Baxendale [1854]
EWHC J70 is the famous case which took place within the English court4. This case simply
wants to explain that defaulter will have to compensate the plaintiff for the breach of contract.
Analysis: From the above rules and regulation of contract law and agreement law, detail
analysis can be done on the case. Firstly, discussing about the case between Ciara and Tom.
Once, the advertisement had been done on the post, both party were willing to have a further
discussion on the property. Here, offer had been given by Ciera to Tom to purchase the property
3 (Cuniberti, 2016)
4 (Lowrey, 2015)

at a price of £380,000. The deal has been done between the party regarding the purchase of
property where it was clear the final settlement will be done on the completion of the work of
repairing. Carlill vs Carbolic Smoke Ball2 (1892) is the case which says that offer was made by
one party where another had shown the interest and accepted the terms and condition. In the
similar form, there was the offer made by Ciera on which Tom had shown the acceptance. But,
the certain terms and condition where included in this case which is that final payment will be
done once the work of repair will be completed.
Here, condition was kept in the contract by Tom that he will do the final payment only
once work of repairing will be completed. But, Tom refused to accept the property by giving the
justification that repairing work has not been done appropriately. But, in this particular situation
Ciera doesn’t has the option to file the case against Tom. Cutter v Powell [1795] EWHC KB
J13, is the case, which says that discharge of contract can be only done in the situation where
both the party show their involvement in the contract and performs their part of work and if any
of the party fails to do so then condition of breach of contract will be applicable or it can be said
that payment will be only done when one party perform their part of work completely5. It clearly
indicates that the decision was taken by Tom was correct as consideration was not completed in
his form of agreement.
Talking about the second situation in the case, where Ciera had made the contract with to
complete the work with the given time period of one month. It has been decided that in the mid
of a contract to change the amount of consideration, that addition £5000 will be required to
complete the work on time on which Ciera had shown her acceptance. Finally, Ciera refused to
pay the amount. As per the detail inspection done by Tom, it was found that work of repairing
was not done property. But, Ciera has breached the contract by not paying the addition amount of
money to Los Property Repair. Here, it becomes the liability of Ciera to pay addition amount of
£5000 to Los Property Repair for the completion of their duty on time.
Conclusion: Firstly, having the detail discussion, it can be determined that law of
contract has the huge importance as it simply says that how any of the work is to be in the legal
format. Secondly, it will be responsibility of Ciera to pay the deposited amount back to Tom as
she was not able to fulfil the terms and condition of law. Here, Tom has the right to collect the
deposit amount of £200,000 from Ciera6. In addition, the case between Ciera and Los Property
5 (Cutter v Powell, 2018).
6 (Acemoglu and Jackson, 2017)

Repair, both Ciera and repairing company had breached the terms and condition. Although, work
was completed on time but it was obtained that repairing work was not done properly due to
which agreement between Ciera and Tom was terminated. Here, Ciera will have to option to
claim with Los Property for the breach of terms and condition. In simple words, in any of the
contract, elements like Offer, acceptance and consideration plays the most crucial role. If in any
of the situation this terms will not be considered, then chances of occurrence of breach of
contract will increase automatically.
REFERENCES
Books & Journals
Acemoglu, D. and Jackson, M. O., 2017. Social norms and the enforcement of laws. Journal of
the European Economic Association. 15(2). pp.245-295.
Burns, L. D., Mullet, K. K. and Bryant, N. O., 2016. The business of fashion: Designing,
manufacturing, and marketing. Bloomsbury Publishing USA.
Cuniberti, G., 2016. The Laws of Asian International Business Transactions. Pac. Rim L. &
Pol'y J.25. p.35.
Lowrey, K. M., 2015. State laws addressing youth sports-related traumatic brain injury and the
future of concussion law and policy. J. Bus. & Tech. L.. 10. p.61.
Png, I. P., 2017. Law and innovation: evidence from state trade secrets laws. Review of
Economics and statistics. 99(1). pp.167-179.
Online
Cutter v Powell.2018. [Online]. Available Through: <http://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/Cutter-v-
Powell.php>