Contract Law Report: Galloping Geese Ltd. v. Rachel Menzies

This report delves into the intricacies of contract law by examining the case of Galloping Geese Ltd. v. Rachel Menzies. The report begins with an introduction to contract law, outlining the essential elements for a valid contract, including offer, acceptance, and consideration. It then presents the facts of the case, highlighting the dispute between Galloping Geese Ltd. and Rachel Menzies, a PhD student. The report focuses on the grounds of appeal, specifically addressing the application of promissory estoppel. It analyzes the arguments put forth by Galloping Geese Ltd., emphasizing the breach of contract and the subsequent counter-offer. Finally, the report concludes that the appellant is entitled to a balance of £1000, and the defense of estoppel should not apply. The report references relevant legal literature to support its analysis, providing a comprehensive overview of the legal principles at play in the case.

Contract Law
(Individual CW-1

Content
 Introduction
 Galloping Geese Ltd. v. Rachel Menzies
 Grounds of Appeal
 Arguments by Galloping Geese Ltd.
 Conclusion
 References

The contract law regulated the rights,
obligations, relations and conduct of the
parties who have entered into a valid contract
with each. In order to make the valid contract
binding, there are few essentials to it which
must be fulfilled. It includes offer by one
party, acceptance by the other, consideration
and intention to create legal relationship.
Introduction

Galloping Geese Ltd. v. Rachel Menzies
 Facts of the case
 If it pleases your Lordship, I am a senior counsel for Galloping Geese Ltd,
who is an appellant in the case. Would your Lordship benefit from hearing the
summary of the facts of the appeal. The summary facts is that Rachel Menzies
was a PhD student who had student debt from her studies but for fortunate to
complete her post graduation without debt.

Grounds of Appeal
 My Lord, I will be addressing the first ground of appeal which is that the defence
based on promissory estoppel will not apply as there has not been voluntary
acceptance and true accord by Galloping Geese Ltd.

Arguments by Galloping Geese Ltd
 My Lord, the first submission on behalf of appellant is that in order to
constitute the contract, the offer was placed by the appellant with a
consideration of £1200 and the respondent, Rachel have agreed to it.
When the time has arrived to make the payment, she denied to pay
and fulfil her legal obligation. There was a breach of contract from
the side of respondent. After the breach, Rachel made counter offer to
which the appellant accepted it reluctantly.

Conclusion
 It is concluded from this PPT that contract law is a civil law dealing in righst and
obligations of the party. The rule of promissory estoppel states that when an
individual makes a promise with an intention of affecting or creating a lawful
relationship to other person and that person acts on it, then that promise should be
made binding and it would not be allowed to back to its words. Hence, in this case,
appellant is entitled to £1000 balance and the defence of estoppel shall not apply.

References
Braci A, 'Contract Law: An Introduction To The English Law Of Contract For The Civil
Lawyer' (2017) 26 King's Law Journal
C. F. C., 'Contract—Action Whether Founded On Contract Or Tort—Costs—County
Courts Act, 1919, S. 11' (2019) 6 The Cambridge Law Journal
Schwartz A, and Scott R, 'Contract Theory And The Limits Of Contract Law' (2017) 113
The Yale Law Journal.

Thank You