Essential Elements of Contract Law

This article explores the essential elements of contract law, including the rules of offer, acceptance, revocation, and postal communication. It discusses the importance of these elements in creating a valid and binding contract.

BUSINESS LAW

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................3
CONTRACT LAW..........................................................................................................................3
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................7
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................8

INTRODUCTION
Business law refers to the body of law which is mainly regulated to control the business
activities. Usually government impose laws in relation to examining the smooth working of the
business and also manage the business activities in accurate way to provide longer term gain to
business (Reinke and Zumbansen, 2019). Corporate law mainly deal in managing the business
operation so that they can secure the rights of the parties regarding dealing in valid contract.
Present essay is related to examining the terms of contract and also the agreement which is made
between the James and Elizabeth regarding offering sale of van.
CONTRACT LAW
Contract law refers to such laws which is mainly imposed when two or more person
enters into the contract regarding dealing in any valuable things in exchanges of some
considerations amount. To make the contract valid, it carries three terms such as the intention of
parties regarding dealing something, one party offer something and other party accepts such
offers and such offer must be made in the form of considerations. The agreement which is made
must be mutually and also the parties are competent to enter and make the contract and its terms
valid (Dorresteijn and et.al., 2016). As there is wider difference between the contract and
agreement as all agreement are turned out to be contract but all contract are not agreement.
Usually the contract are legally bound upon the parties to follow it, until it carries the term which
is void or affects the right of the parties.
In relation to undertaking the matters relating to rule of offer, it refers to when one party
offers some valuable things with the intention of entering into the agreement, that person stated
to be the offeror. The rule regarding the offer is that it carries the contractual intent which they
are liable to be bound by the contract. In the rule of offer, the invitation to treat is undertaken in
which the indication is determined regarding negotiating the contract in respect of pre offer
communication (Stone and Devenney, 2017). As it is necessary to communicate the matters
before agreeing with the terms mentioned in the contract. By imposing the rule of offer in the
present case scenario, it is stated that there is written communication between the James and
Elizabeth regarding selling the van for £3,000. James offers to Elizabeth regarding preferring to
buy the van for £3,000. Thus, after making the offer to Elizabeth, it is the duty of the James to
fulfil such offer with the said terms in respect of avoiding the breach in contract. This is

supported with the relevant case such as Harvey v Facey [1893] AC 552, the issues is raised
regarding not fulfilling the offer once made. As Harvey which is the appellant carry the deal
regarding purchasing of the objects and for this perspective, they made the telegram to the Facey
regarding accepting the prices which is offered by the Facey regarding purchasing the pen
(Harvey v. Facey (1893), 2013). But later the Facey refuses to perform the contract. The
judgement raised by judges is that there is not agreement made between the parties as the
information sent through telegram is just the offer which is made by Facey.
The another things which is needed in the contract is relating to the rule of acceptance.
To enter into the valid contract, it is necessary that other party accepts such offer and that person
is stated to be the offeree. The acceptance must also be communicated and then only it is valid in
terms of law (Phang, 2018). Acceptance refers to the promise which is made between the parties
regarding carrying the term of the contract in right manner. Contract is made for particular time
period and if any breach committed after the expiry of time period, then it not result in getting
compensation for the losses incurred. In the case of James V Elizabeth, James makes an offer for
sale of his van for £3,000 and in return Elizabeth send the postcard of accepting the van but in
respect of £2,900 but on the same date she changed her mind and accept the deal of £3,000, and
she informed this through carrying letter. As in this case the contract is not made, if the James
accepts the price of £2,900. As James had only offered the deal but the other party not accepting
the offer with the said terms.
The rule of Acceptance is that when both party accepts to perform the contract on the said
terms which they decide regarding entering into the agreement. The rule stated in respect of
postal application as the acceptance cannot be termed to be valid until the offeror communicated
with him directly or also the post is made on right address (de Elizalde, 2018). Thus, in this case,
it reflects the matters relating to the counter of offer in which if the offer is changed in any way,
than it kills the originality of the offer and it thus not remain valid in future perspective. The case
relating to acceptance of the offer is stated with the case as Butler machine Tool V Ex Cell O
Corporation [1979] 1 WLR 401 Court of appeal, as the deal is made regarding purchasing of
machinery with the set pricing and also the price can be fluctuated depending upon the time
period. But the confusion raised and Ex- Cell- O not signed the clause regarding fluctuation of
prices and deliver the paper to Butler (Butler machine Tool V Ex Cell O Corporation [1979] 1
WLR 401 Court of appeal, 2020). Butler also in return not verify the paper and sign the slip

stated overleaf. After 10 months as per the time period of deal, Butler sent the products with high
pricing but Ex cell O refuse to accept it. Thus, the judgement of the court is made regarding not
carrying the right clause and thus it refers to the matters of the counter offer. The terms and
condition which are mentioned in contract are amended as per the parties' capability which
resulting in not legally bound to follow it.
In context of revocation attained by the parties, it refers to cancellation of contract when
the parties feel that it affect the right of their interest. In context of undertaking the matters
relating to offering the valuable things, the offeror can revoke the offer at any time before the
procedure of acceptance is undertaken (Poole, 2016). In respect of acceptance, it can be revoked
at any time before the communication is undertaken regarding accepting the offer against the
offeree. Thus, the revocation can be done on the bases of the cancelling the offer when the
offeror find that there are no needs of the further contract and for that communication is to be
done regarding informing the other party about the termination or cancellation of the contract
(Che Hashim, 2018). This is deeply explained with the case study of the Hyde V Wrench [1840]
as in this case the deal is made regarding purchasing of the property between the Wrench and
Hyde. Wrench offers the sell of his farm to Hyde Regarding paying £1,000 but Hyde refuses to
accept the offer and decided to pay £950 (Hyde v Wrench (1840) 49 ER 132, 2020). But after
some time period, Hyde decided to purchase the farm as per the offered amount which is made
by wrench.
After receiving the letter from Hyde regarding accepting the offer, he refuses to pay the
farm to Hyde which in return, Hyde files the suit against Wrench regarding committing offences
of not fulfilling the contract. Thus, as per the judgement raised by in the court, the judges
decided that the contract is not related to the binding contract and thus, is not valid in terms of
law (Armour and Enriques, 2018). By undertaking this case study, in the present case scenario,
James carries the rights regarding revoking the contract as it is not bound by the parties regarding
following the terms or promise which is made between them. Thus, revocation in respect of
James is undertaken through cancelling the contract before Elizabeth accept the offers or if they
are not agreeing with any of the terms.
In terms of Postal rules, it mainly comes into existence when the acceptance of the offer
take place through communication. Thus, this rules is applied in case of communicating the
matters through the form of postal (Adriaanse, 2016). The contract in form of postal is

undertaken when the contract is made between the parties through carrying the proper letter or
post gram with stamping and carrying the detailed address of the offeree to whom the offer is
made. Thus, the rules indicates that the contract made through postal is valid, if it reached within
the set time period and also on accurate address (Ler, 2019). This is supported with the case
study which reflect the issues regarding sending confirmation through postal. In case of Adams
V Lindsell (1818) 106 ER 250, this case reflects the matters relating to the offering the sale of
wool through the letter. As defendant offers the wool to claimant regarding purchasing the wool
and also if agree than acceptance is to be sent through letter (Adams v Lindsell | Contract Law
Case, 2020). As claimant sent the acceptance letter to defendant but due to certain circumstance,
the letter gets delayed which results in losing the contract which is made between them. As
defendant feels that claimant is not interest in the contract, and then he sells the wool to third
party (Taylor and Taylor, 2019). Thus, in this case the judgement is to be raised regarding not
carrying any binding contract and also the communication is also not undertaken before revoking
the contract.
Thus, the judgement which is raised in this case study is relevant to not carrying the
binding contract as no promise is made between the parties regarding accepting the offer through
postal. As James offer the sale of van to Elizabeth and in return Elizabeth sends the postcard
regarding concession of the prices of van (Goodrich, 2017). As this reflects that the no promise is
undertaken between any of the parties regarding accepting the offers. Secondly it is also stated
that this is no exchange of consideration money is undertaken regarding forming the terms of
contract. As in contract, it is necessary that both the parties agreed in the particular consideration
regarding carrying the valid contract.
The another perspective which is examined in this contract is relating to not binding
contract upon the parties regarding as there is mainly offer undertaken but not any aspects of
undertaking the offer (Marsh, 2017). Thus, from the above study, it is examined that to enter into
the valid contract various terms and condition are to be satisfies which make the contract valid.
As in this case the offer of selling van is undertaken but the acceptance regarding such offer is
not clear. Thus, James carries the right regarding revoking the contract before he gets the
acceptance letters regarding agreeing with the deal but in this case the letter and post card both
received on the same date. Thus, he cannot revoke the contract until not commute with the
offeree regarding accepting such contract (Sasso, 2016). In such aspects, no valid contract is

undertaken between the parties as both are not carrying any binding terms which reflects the
essential aspects which is required in making the contract valid.
In relation to applying the rule relating to offer, acceptance, revocation and postal, they
carry the right regarding undertaking the matters in better way in relation to securing the dealing
regarding entering into the contract (Kuhnel-Fitchen and Hough, 2017). Theses are the major
aspects which is required in making the contract effective and also securing the right of the
parties in respect of not facing breach in any of the terms.
CONCLUSION
From the above study, the report concludes the matters relating to examining the essential
elements of the contract law which results in providing the valid contract and also secure the
right of the parties. It is also examined that the rule of postal offer is different as no revocation of
contract is undertaken without carrying the acceptance procedure to communicate with the
offeree. Thus, it is necessary that there must be binding contract which resulting in securing the
rights of the parties and also intention of one party to perform the contract to make it valid.

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Adriaanse, M. J., 2016. Construction contract law. Macmillan International Higher Education.
Armour, J. and Enriques, L., 2018. The promise and perils of crowdfunding: between corporate
finance and consumer contracts. The Modern Law Review. 81(1). pp.51-84.
Che Hashim, R., 2018. Postal rule in acceptance via email. Commonwealth Law Bulletin. 44(1).
pp.111-127.
de Elizalde, F. ed., 2018. Uniform Rules for European Contract Law?: A Critical Assessment.
Bloomsbury Publishing.
Dorresteijn, A. F. and et.al., 2016. European corporate law. Kluwer Law International BV.
Goodrich, P., 2017. The posthumous life of the postal rule: requiem and revival of Adams v
Lindsell. In Feminist Perspectives on Contract Law. (pp. 87-102). Routledge-Cavendish.
Kuhnel-Fitchen, K. and Hough, T., 2017. Optimize Contract Law. Routledge.
Ler, P. W., 2019. You've Got Mail: Examining the Postal Rule in the Technological Age. Sing.
Comp. L. Rev. p.35.
Marsh, P., 2017. Contract law. In Contracting for project management. (pp. 65-80). Routledge.
Phang, A., 2018. The intractable problems of illegality and public policy in the law of contract–a
comparative perspective. In Essays in Memory of Professor Jill Poole. (pp. 178-234).
Informa Law from Routledge.
Poole, J., 2016. Textbook on contract law. Oxford University Press.
Reinke, B. and Zumbansen, P. C., 2019. Transnational Liability Regimes in Contract, Tort and
Corporate Law: Comparative Observations on ‘Global Supply Chain Liability’.
Sasso, L., 2016. Certain comparative notes on electronic contract formation. Право. Журнал
Высшей школы экономики, (1).
Stone, R. and Devenney, J., 2017. The modern law of contract. Routledge.
Taylor, R. and Taylor, D., 2019. Contract Law Directions. Directions.
Online
Adams v Lindsell | Contract Law Case. 2020. Online. Available through:
<https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/adams-v-lindsell.php>.
Butler machine Tool V Ex Cell O Corporation [1979] 1 WLR 401 Court of appeal. 2020. Online.
Available through: <https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/butler-machine-tool-v-ex-cell-
o.php>.
Harvey v. Facey (1893). 2013. Online. Available through:
<http://www.casebriefsummary.com/harvey-v-facey-1893/>.
Hyde v Wrench (1840) 49 ER 132. 2020. Online. Available through:
<https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/hyde-v-wrench.php>.