Legal Rights or Obligations Case Study 2022

Running Head: CASE STUDY
CASE STUDY
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Authors Note

CASE STUDY1
Scenario 1:
Issue:
The issue in the case is whether Peter and Mary have legal rights or obligations
against James and Joey.
Rules:
Invitation to offer is when an intention to make an offer and negotiate the terms of the
contract has been established by the party. In other words, the offer made after the invitation
for offer is established. This includes displays in shops, advertisements, auctions, invitations
for tenders and so on.
Express Terms are the explicit terms of the contract which bind the parties legally. This
means that the express terms of the contract are the legally enforceable terms which bind the
parties and have been mutually agreed upon (BP Refinery (Westernport) Pty Ltd v Shire of
Hastings [1977] UKPC 13, (1977) 180 CLR 266, Privy Council (on appeal from Australia).).
However, such term should be lawful in nature, not contradicting then Interest of the other
person in the contract.
Non-est factum means that the contract can be revoked as void ab initio on the ground of
fundamental mistake for agreement. However, carelessness of the party to not read the terms
thoroughly shall not be covered by the doctrine (Bant 2009). This is a defense against the
enforceability of the contract wherein the intention to create the contract should be altered by
the mistake. Mere carelessness shall not render the contract as void ab initio (Lloyds Bank v
Waterhouse [1993] 2 FLR 97.).