logo

Bindley Business Law - Assignment

   

Added on  2021-06-05

7 Pages3472 Words88 Views
STU87445 LLB (Hons) Qualifying Law DegreeLaw of ContractTime- Constrained AssignmentSTU87445Poloko Hiri2968

Answer to the Question No. 1I do not agree with the statement because according to section 7(a) of the Contract Act, 1872; acceptance must be absolute and qualified and in the case of a postal rule when the acceptance is posted, it will be considered as effective. A contract cannot be done without actual communication to the offeror.An offer is given first to anyone and wished for accepting the offer which is given by the offeror.If the offeree accepts the offer made by the offeror, then it will be considered as a contract according to law.Acceptance is done by the offeree after agreeing on the terms which are made by the offeror in the contract. For this, there is needed consideration like money or other valuable things, etc.Acceptance can be done by expressing in words (oral) or by written or by conducts. Bur without reaching the contract to the offeror, it will not be counted as effective. According to the law, the acceptance is considered valid when the contract is made expressly.The acceptance must be communicated and there are so many rules regarding this.Acceptance is unconditional. If an offer is accepted by any condition, then it will be considered null.The offer which is made by the offeror is only accepted by that person toward whom the offeror made the contract. But on behalf of the offeree, any person who is authorized can accept the offer. Any agent of the offeree can accept the offer.Silence is not counted as acceptance according to the law. There is a case regarding this,"Felthouse v Bindley"1, a letter was given to a nephew by his uncle offering to buy a horse and ifhis nephew did not answer within two weeks then the offer would be terminated. The court held that there was no contract between them because the nephew did not give any answer.The communication of acceptance is very important for every contract because acceptance is considered effective when it is actually and properly communicated to the offeror or any agent who is authorized by him. This rule is made for given protection to the offeror as he can know that his offer has been accepted.There is an exception of acceptance which is known as the 'postal rule'. It means when the offer is given, it does not accept immediately rather it is posted. The acceptance is done before it's reaching to the offeror and it will also be considered as a valid one. But this rule is not applicablefor all situations rather in some specified cases. This rule is only applicable for those contracts which have been offered are made through letters. There is a case relating to this rule, "Adams v Lindsell"The proper postal rule methods must be used. In the case of Re London & Norther Bank2Evidence of proper posting can be seen in this case. In this case, the letter was correctly stamped and addressed. If the conditions of a postal rule are not fully fulfilled then the postal rule is not applicable.But if any offer is done by face-to-face conversation and the acceptance is posted at that time, then it will not be applicable. There is some case also where the postal rule did not apply. In the case of Entores v Miles Far East Corporation3 case, the court held that if any person gave oral acceptance and if it was drowned out an overflying aircraft such acceptance may not be heard by the offeror that’s why when the aircraft has passed over the acceptor need to repeats his 1Felthouse v Bindley (1862) 11 CB (NS) 8692Re London and Norther Bank (1900)3Entores v Miles Far East Corporation [1955] 2 QB 327

acceptance to the offeror. So with this case, we can conclude that if there is any instantaneous communication like telephone and telex and if two people make a contract by one of it and the line goes ‘dead’ so that the acceptance is incomplete, then the offeror must communicate with the acceptor and confirm that was he accept the offer or not. There is a certain condition that needs to be satisfied before it falls under the postal rule. In Byrne v leon Van Tien Hoven4 case, the defendant sent an offer to the claimant and the claimant received the offer on 11th October. After receiving the letter claimant sent an immediate acceptance letter. Later on, the defendant sent another letter of revocation of the contract and it was received by the claimant on 20th October. The court held that the revocation was not effective until the letter was received by the claimant on 20th October. Although the letter was published on 8 October the revocation was only valid until the letter was received by the claimant. This case is a good example of the objective approach. In Holwell Securities Ltd v Hughes5 case, the general rule exception was recognized in this case. Here court suggested that in some situations postal rule ought not to apply according to the court if the postal rule would lead to any trouble and absurdity then the postal rule would not be applied. This rule is an exception to the normal rule on the communication of acceptance which means it only applies when it is consistent with the offer.The rule that acceptance must be communicated to the offeror is not absolute. In the case of Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co6, in this case, we see that the court said that the conduct done by carbolic smoke co. was an offer of invitational to treat for the whole world that means that The terms of the contract may assert that the offeror does not insist that the acceptance has to be expressed to him. But acceptances sent via the post are the big and most contentious exception. The general rule for this matter set on the case of Adams v Lindsell 7that the acceptance shall take place upon receipt of the letter of acceptance by the offeree. The acceptance shall take place upon receipt of the letter of acceptance by the offeree. In Henthorn v Fraser 8case, the court said that the postal rule only applied when the post is fair. It is therefore not necessarily accurate to assume that the offeror has acknowledged the risk of delay in post. Now the main question is whether the general rule is to create an injustice or not. After the case of Byrne v Van Tienhoven we can say that the justifications of the general rule seem to be weak and it can give rise to the manifest injury. Later on, we see that an exception of the general rule was recognized in Holwell Securities Ltd v Hughes case.Now, if I analyze the rule that acceptance must be communicated to the offeror is not absolute then we see that in the normal rule of the acceptance mention that acceptance takes place when itreceived by the offeror that means that when the offeror receives that the offer was accepted by the offeree only then the contract is valid. But in the general rule of a postal rule, we see that it mentions that the offeror cannot revoke the offer which he will send if the offeree posted acceptance on it. But now there are quicker methods of communication and if we rely on the general rule of acceptance then it can give rise to manifest injustice for that reason in Holwell Securities Ltd v Hughes case we that an exception of the general rule was established. If we see Article 16(1) and 18(2) of the Vienna Convention Act for the International Sales of Goods9mention that at the moment the confirmation of approval reaches the offeror, an acceptance of the offer becomes effective. An acceptance is not valid unless the approval of the agreement is 4Byrne v leon Van Tien Hoven (1880) 5 CPD 3445Holwell Securities Ltd v Hughes [1974] 1 WLR 1556Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co [1893] 1 QB 2567Adams v Lindsell (1818) 1 B & Ald 681 8Henthorn v Fraser [1892] Ch 279 Sale of Goods (Vienna Convention) Act 1986

End of preview

Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.

Related Documents
Legal Advice for Robert in Business Law
|13
|4068
|137

Communication Rules in the Adam v Lindsell Case
|11
|2709
|47

Application of Postal Rule in Business & Contract Legal Studies
|8
|2319
|345

Business Law
|8
|2269
|2

Corporation Law Assignment
|10
|2382
|162

Business and Corporations Law Research Assignment
|14
|2895
|406