Law for Commerce Assignment

This assignment is based on three case studies in law for commerce. The first case study discusses whether the decision of High Court is binding upon the Victorian Supreme Court of Appeal. The second case study involves a contract between James and Nico where James revokes his offer, but Nico has already accepted it. The third case study is about a contract between Jilly and Jane, which is based on two prime cases of English Contract Act.

Running head: LAW FOR COMMERCE
Case study
Name of the student:
Name of the university:
Author note

1LAW FOR COMMERCE
Table of Contents
Answer to case no. 1..................................................................................................................2
Issue:.......................................................................................................................................2
Rule:.......................................................................................................................................2
Application:............................................................................................................................2
Conclusion:.............................................................................................................................3
Answer to case no. 2..................................................................................................................3
Issue:.......................................................................................................................................3
Rules:......................................................................................................................................3
Application:............................................................................................................................3
Conclusion:.............................................................................................................................4
Answer to case study no. 3.........................................................................................................4
Issue:.......................................................................................................................................4
Rules:......................................................................................................................................4
Application:............................................................................................................................4
Conclusion:.............................................................................................................................5
Reference:..................................................................................................................................6

2LAW FOR COMMERCE
Answer to case no. 1
Issue:
The main issue that are to be determined in this case is whether the decision or
judgment of High Court is binding upon the Victorian Supreme Court of Appeal or not.
Rule:
There are certain rules in Australian legal system where it has been mentioned that
in certain circumstances, the lower courts are obliged to follow the rulings of the higher
court. Here certain circumstances mean when the matter of fact of the case is similar in
nature. This rule is known as the doctrine of precedents (Depoorter and Rubin 2017). The
judges of the lower court are not allowed to stray the decisions taken by the higher court in
respect of similar circumstances. This rule is quite common in nature and has been
maintained in almost every country.
However, it is also a fact that if any decision has been taken in similar kinds of
court or by the same level of court, the decisions should not be binding in nature, rather it can
be persuasive in nature. As an example, it can be stated that if a judge of the High Court has
taken a decision, the decision will be persuasive to the other judges of the High Court and the
judges will not bind by the decision (MacCormick, Summers and Goodhart 2016).
Application:
Australia is a federal country, High Court is superior to the Victorian Supreme
Court of Appeal (VSCA), and therefore it can be stated that the decisions of the High Court
will be binding on the Victorian Supreme Court. However, if any judge of VSCA has taken
any decision, they will not be binding on the other judges of VSCA.

3LAW FOR COMMERCE
Conclusion:
Therefore, in this case, the decision of the High Court will be taken with utmost
priority.
Answer to case no. 2
Issue:
The main issue in this case is to decide whether the contract made between James
and Nico is valid or not.
Rules:
The case is based on the principle of revocation of offer and acceptance. In the case
of Dickinson v Dodds (1876) 2 Ch D 463 it has been held that if the offeror wants to revoke
the offer, he should inform about this to the person to whom the offer has been made. Further,
the information should be served before letter has been posted (Gañán et al. 2015).
Revocation will not be effective if the offeree has accepted the offer. In case of Adams v
Lindsell (1818) 106 ER 250, it has been observed in case of postal rules, if the acceptor has
sent his consent over the order, the order will be treated to be accepted and therefore, the
same could not be revoked. In Thomas & anr v BPE Solicitors [2010] EWHC 306 (Ch), it
has been held that if the acceptor has sent a mail to the offeror, the offer will be deemed to be
accepted in nature. The offeror needs not to read the mail (Kwan 2017).
Application:
In this case, James had made an offer to Nico where he had requested Nico to take
the responsibility of organising a party. However, after a while he had changed his decision
and wanted to revoke the offer. However, before James informed Nico about the revocation,

4LAW FOR COMMERCE
Nico had accepted the offer and therefore, it can be stated that the offer made by James has
been accepted by Nico.
Conclusion:
Considering this, it can be stated that valid contract has been made in between Nico
and James.
Answer to case study no. 3
Issue:
The issue that are required to be identified is whether any contract has been made
in between Jilly and Jane.
Rules:
This case is based on the two prime cases of English Contract Act. In Merritt v
Merritt [1970] 1 WLR 1211, the court has observed that in case of domestic relationship, any
agreement will not treated as legal unless there is any proper evidence shown by the parties.
On the other hand, the case of Balfour v Balfour [1919] 2 KB 571 has made a conjuncture
with this case. According to this case, any domestic agreement can be legal in nature (Scott
and Scott 2015).
Application:
According to the case, Jilly and Jane are friends and as per Merritt’s case, there
should not be any legal agreement made in between them. On the other hand, this kind of
presumption can be rebutted based on the decision made in Balfour’s case. It has been
observed that Jane had left her lifestyle for Jilly with a presumption that Jilly wanted to create
legal relationship with Jane.

5LAW FOR COMMERCE
Conclusion:
Considering the decisions made in Balfour, it can be stated that valid contract made
in between Jane and Jilly.

6LAW FOR COMMERCE
Reference:
Depoorter, B. and Rubin, P.H., 2017. Judge-Made Law and the Common Law Process. The
Oxford Handbook of Law and Economics: Volume 3: Public Law and Legal Institutions,
p.129.
Gañán, C., Mata-Díaz, J., Muñoz, J.L., Esparza, O. and Alins, J., 2015. A model for
revocation forecasting in public-key infrastructures. Knowledge and Information
Systems, 43(2), pp.311-331.
Kwan, M., 2017. Unilateral Renewal Option in Quebec: The Unexplored Legal Method to
Stop Contract Renewal Through Revocation of Offer.
MacCormick, D.N., Summers, R.S. and Goodhart, A.L. eds., 2016. Interpreting precedents: a
comparative study. Routledge.
Scott, E.S. and Scott, R.E., 2015. From Contract to Status: Collaboration and the Evolution of
Novel Family Relationships. Colum. L. Rev., 115, p.293.