Contract Law Case Study: Adrian and Brian

This assignment delves into a contract law case study involving Adrian and Brian. It examines the elements of a contract, particularly offer and acceptance, through the lens of their interaction. The analysis evaluates whether a valid contract was formed and explores Brian's potential liability for breach of contract.

CONTRACT LAW

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................1
Offer and Acceptance..................................................................................................................1
Argument.....................................................................................................................................2
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................3
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................4

INTRODUCTION
A voluntary agreement between different parties may be two or more, that is enforceable
by law with binding all the parties in a legal agreement is known as contract. The given case
study is between two persons Adrian and Brian where Adrian is wishing to sell his laptop and
makes an offer for the same, and Brian on the offer of Adrian is giving a Counter offer to him.
Adrian decided to accept the Counter offer of Brian by posting a letter to inform him and by also
messaging him through fax. In this overall situation, both of them faces some problems and
Adrian raises that Brian is in Breach of contract. Therefore, in this research, facts about contact
law and counter offer will be presented along with related case studies.
Legal issues: specify
The advert is an offer as in the given case Adrian wished to sell his laptop and put an
advert in Free-ads, Offer for sale: Tech-nik 300 £1000, followed by his phone number. after
having used the ball three times daily for two weeks according to the printed directions supplied
with each ball. It clearly indicates invitation to treat instead of an offer. For example, in the case
of Partridge v Crittenden (1968) 2 All ER 421. The defendant places an advert in which it offers
some bramble finches for sale S.6.
Law: Advert is an invitation to treat because Adrian had put an offer for people who are
interested in buying laptop. For example, in the case of Carlill v Carbolic Smokeball Co. As in
this case a newspaper advert was placed by defendant stated that reward of £100 will be paid by
the Carbolic Smoke ball company that if any individual suffers from influenza. Intention was
reflected from the wording of the advert in which is it stated that £1000 was deposited in the
bank which shows its seriousness related to the offer which he made.
In the given case it is invitation to treat because Adrian has made an offer in an advert
offer and Brian had accepted the offer. It can be justified through demonstrating the case of
Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co in which it is clearly shows that defendant place advert in
newspaper and it was offer to world and Mrs Carlill purchase the ball and caught flu.
Acceptance-letter
Legal issue – Yes Adrian acceptance by post is valid
1

Law –Yes it should be effective and communicated on time. This can be reflected from the case
Tinn v Hoffman as it shows that Mr. tinn with an offer to sell him 800 tons of iron form the price
of 69s per ton. He requested a reply to this offer by post. On the same day without knowing the
offer Mr Tin wrote with similar terms and this case was considered as a cross offers. This case is
also considered that the contract is valid or not as it become invalid due to information was not
communicated on time. One of the similar case is of Holwell Securities v Hughes [1974] 1 in
which offer was made and letter was posted by Holwell but it is not received by Hughes.
Therefore, in case Dr, Hughes specify that he had to actually received the communication and
therefore excluded the postal rule. Apart from this in the case of Adams V Lindshell defendant
offer to sell them some wool and ask for an answer in the course of post. The letter way delayed
in the pose while on the day when letter was received then claimant posted a letter of acceptance
on the4 same day. However there way delay from the side of defendant had assumed that another
party was no interested in the offer and it sold the third party’s. Further claimant sued for breach
of contract.
Applying thse law: from the case of Holwell Securities v Hughes it is clear that if postal
rule applied then the is clearly contract as because agent of Holewell mailed the acceptance.
However, the postal rule does not apply in the case when the term of contract which point to the
necessity of actual communication. Similar to this in the given case Adrian there was delay in the
post and it was delay in the post and was not delivered to Brian’s houses. The case is considered
as mutual assent to an agreement occur in the particular circumstance of a mail contract.
Advice – Letter was delayed until Thursday so the condition that a written answer must be
received by Wednesday has effectively ousted the postal rule. Letter wasn’t communicated on
time so not valid.
Acceptance- Yes Adrian acceptance by fax is valid
Legal issue: From the case of Tinn V Hoffman of it is clear that in order to form a valid contract
there should be a communication which consist of an offer and acceptance. On the other side
from the case of Entroes Ltd. V miles Far East Corp the claimant sent telex message and there is
other party had accepted the offer but the acceptance need to be communicated to the offeree
2

therefore the contract was made In England. Therefore, in the case of Adrian there was no
acceptance was communicated so contract was not formed.
Applying the law: The contract can be formed at the time when it is communicated by offers
party on time as it is clear from the case of Tinn V Hoffman.
Advice: Fax sent within office hours before the deadline so Adrian can reasonably expect Brian
to read it. Fax is effective and communicated so a contract has been created
Revocation
Legal issue: No Brian revocation is not valid as because
Law: As per the law it is important to communicate before revocation or it must be revoked
before acceptances. . From the case of Routledge v Grant as offer can be withdrawn within the
six week period without incurring any liability. While from the Bryne V Van tien Hoven it is
clear that revocation must be communicated.
Applying the law – Brian buying another laptop could be interpreted as revocation by conduct.
However, he does this after the fax became a valid method of acceptance.
Advice. Brian is in breach of contract.
Offer and Acceptance
Offer:
An offer is a proposal made by a person to another person to either accept or reject the
order. Two parties are involved in this agreement where, person who makes an offer is called
offeror or promisor, and to whom the offer is made is known as offeree or promise (Adriaanse,
2016). In the given case of Adrian and brain, Adrian is an offeror and Brian is and offeree. This
further includes following components:
Unilateral Contract: It is a contract where only one party makes an offer expressing
promise without even receiving the reciprocal agreement from the other party (Contracts Law:
Offer and Acceptance, 2012). Under this contract, an offeree cannot be forced by the offerer as
there no return promise made by offeree to offeror.
Invitation to treat: It is generally not an offer, however, it shows willingness of parties
to negotiate a contract. As per the case law of harvey v/s Facey, there was an indication by the
3

owner that she was interested in selling his house was concluded that it was an invitation to treat
the offer and not an offer.
Revocation of offer: It is a right with the offeror to revoke an offer before it has been
accepted by the offeree. However, it is subject to the communication about the revocation of
offer to the offeree.
Counter Offer: When an another offer is made by an offeree to the offeror in response to
the initial offer is a counter offer (Hyde v/s wrench).
Acceptance:
It refers to the final expression that provides assent to the terms and conditions of offer. A
binding contract is formed after a valid acceptance takes place (Knapp, Crystal and Prince,
2016). An acceptance to be valid must constitute following:
 Acceptance of offer must be communicated to the offeree.
 Terms on which acceptance is based, must match with the terms of offer.
 There must be a certain agreement.
Communication: Before the offer becomes effective, offeror must get acceptance. Silence of
promise does not constitutes to the acceptance (Felthouse v/s Bindley) and an offer can be
accepted through conduct [Brogden v. Metropolitan Railway Co. (1877) 2 App. Cas. 666].
Postal rule: If posting a letter has been agreed as the means of communication between the
parties, then postal rule applies. As per this rule, acceptance of offer takes place at the time
when a properly addressed stamped letter is placed in the post box.
Argument
It can be seen in the case of Adrian and Brian, that Brian made an another offer to Adrian
in the response of Adrian's offer. When a counter offer is made, the original offer does not
remain open for longer (Cartwright, 2016).
In the given case study, original offer of Adrian to sell his laptop at £1000 ends at the
time when Brian counter offers of purchasing Adrian's laptop at £500. Brian wanted the answer
4

or acceptance of Adrean in written form till the next Wednesday. And Adrian on Tuesday,
posted the letter in post and also on the same day sent a letter through fax which was reached to
the table of Brian. However, the letter which was posted got late in post and did not arrived at
Brian's address on time. But as per the postal rule as discussed above, an offer is accepted when
letter is placed in the letter box.
According to the case study of Adams v/s Lindsell, as per the defendant, there could not
be a binding contract unless and until he has not received answer. From the given case
judgement was made that, the acceptance did arrive in the course of post (Contractual agreement
- offer and acceptance, 2017).
However, as it was not agreed by the parties that acceptance had to be made through post
so even if the parties exclude the postal rule, Adrian has also made the acceptance by the way of
fax which was reached to the Brian on time. It was not the fault of Adrian that his fax letter of
acceptance burried under the pile of papers and Brian did not read that. From the overall analysis
it can be said that, Adrian has fulfilled all the terms and conditions regarding acceptance of
promise in a right manne. But Brian had not adhered to his promise and had not purchased laptop
from Adrean at his own quoted price i.e. £500.
Difference between criminal law and civil law
There is a significant different between criminal law and civil law. In criminal law it defined
by the legislation and enforced by the police. Further in it clear boundaries are set for an
individual behaviour in a society. On the other side in civil laws it is related with the protecting
the rights of individuals which is necessary protected by criminal laws. Along with this in the
legal action can be taken by those who have they claimed to have wronged them.
As per the given case, they both made a contract but both the elements of contract are not
fulfilled in the case as it was not accepted by other party due to some issues. Therefore, there is
no contract formed in between both the parties and Adrian is not liable to claim against the
Brian.
5

CONCLUSION
From the above research it has been concluded that, a legal contract includes an
agreement between two or more parties that is enforced by the law. A contract to be a legal
contact must have an expression of agreement between the parties. The case study of Adrian and
Brian is based upon the law of counter offer where acceptance is made by Andrean by postal
letter and also by fax letter within the stipulated time. However, Brian was unable to undertake
agreement and was alleged to have committed breach of contract. From the overall analysis of
the case study and also by referring to other similar case studies it can be said that, Brian did
breach of contract and is liable to penalties and prosecution.
6

REFERENCES
Books and journals
Adriaanse, M. J., 2016. Construction contract law. Palgrave Macmillan.
Cartwright, J., 2016. Contract law: An introduction to the English law of contract for the civil
lawyer. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Knapp, C. L., Crystal, N. M. and Prince, H. G., 2016. Problems in Contract Law: cases and
materials. Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.
Online
Contracts Law: Offer and Acceptance, 2012. [Online] Available through
:<http://www.4lawschool.com/contracts101/offer.htm>.
Contractual agreement - offer and acceptance, 2017. [Online] Available through
:<http://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/Offer-and-acceptance.php/>.
7