Corporate Law Case Study: Janice's Contract Revocation Analysis

This case study delves into corporate law, specifically focusing on contract law principles. It presents two case studies. The first case explores whether an offer is revocable after acceptance, examining the intentions of a party who attempts to cancel a contract with malice. The second case investigates the validity of a strategy to revoke a contract. The analysis involves the principles of offer and acceptance, breach of contract, and the legal implications of attempting to avoid contractual obligations, referencing relevant legal precedents and acts to determine the outcomes of these cases. The student analyzes the legal arguments and determines the validity of the contract made between the two parties.

Running head: CORPORATE LAW
Case Study
Name of the student:
Name of the university:
Author note

1CORPORATE LAW
Table of Contents
Case study 1.............................................................................................................................................2
Issue:....................................................................................................................................................2
Rules:...................................................................................................................................................2
Application:.........................................................................................................................................2
Conclusion:..........................................................................................................................................3
Case study 2.............................................................................................................................................3
Issue:....................................................................................................................................................3
Rules:...................................................................................................................................................3
Application:.........................................................................................................................................3
Conclusion:..........................................................................................................................................4
Reference:................................................................................................................................................5

2CORPORATE LAW
Case study 1
Issue:
The main issue of the case is to determine whether an offer can be revocable once, it is
accepted or not. In the present case, it has been observed that Janice had made a contract to
Tim regarding a painting and a day before; she wanted to cancel the same with certain malice
intent.
Rules:
The present case is based on the general principle of offer and acceptance. The offer and
acceptance are the primary step regarding a contract (McKendrick, 2014). If a party wants to
sell a particular thing, he makes an offer. When the other party agreed to the offer, he accepts
the same. In this process a purchase agreement be regularise. Contract is binding in nature
and the base of the contract should be legal. It has been stated that when a contract is made,
consent of the other party is necessary to terminate the same. In Byne & co. v Leon Van
Tienhoven (1880), it has been observed that if a contracting party changes its mind regarding
the offer, he should have to communicate with the other party about his willingness. If the
consent is not being obtained, the affected party can sue the other for breach of contract and
claim damage regarding the same (Cartwright, 2016).
Application:
In the case, it has been observed that contract regarding the painting has been made between
Janice and Tim and afterwards, Janice wanted to terminate the contract without the consent of
Tim and chalk out a strategy to avoid the same. She wanted to establish another company and
through the same, wanted to avoid the contract with Tim. It can be stated that the

3CORPORATE LAW
incorporation of the new company could not restrict the contract with Tim as the intention of
Janice is illegal in nature.
Conclusion:
Therefore, it can be stated that the contract made in between Janice and Tim will be remain
valid and Janice is bound to sell the painting to Tim. Incorporation of the company is illegal
as it is sued to avoid the legal base of the former contract.
Case study 2
Issue:
The main issue of the case is to determine whether the strategy taken by Janice regarding the
revocation of contract with Tim is valid or not.
Rules:
It has been clear that Janice had an intention to sell the painting to Tim before and therefore,
she is bound to sell the painting to him as the offer had been accepted by Tim. The relevant
principle regarding the same has been mentioned in Harvey v Facey [1893] UKPC 1. It has
stated in Dickinson v Dodds (1876) 2 Ch. D. 463 that offer can be dissolved at any time
before the same has been accepted. Besides this, if the offer maker died, then the offer can be
revoked (O'Sullivan, & Hilliard, 2016). However, in this case it has been observed that Janice
made a contract and she is the offer maker on behalf of her company. it has also been

4CORPORATE LAW
mentioned under the Australian Contract Act that if the offer maker wants to cancel the offer,
he or she has to communicate with the other party (Macdonald, Atkins & Atkins, 2014).
Application:
In the present case, Janice wanted to revoke the contract with Tim and therefore, adopted
certain malice excuse. She tried to concoct a story regarding the corporate constitution of the
company. however, the same principle could not be taken by her as the contract was made in
between her and Tim and therefore, she is bound by the contract with Tim. If Janice could not
deliver the painting to Tim, he can sue Janice for the breach of contract.
Conclusion:
Therefore, it can be stated that Janice is bound by the law to deliver the painting to Tim and
the rules of the corporation that has been taken by her could not be validated.

5CORPORATE LAW
Reference:
Cartwright, J. (2016). Contract law: An introduction to the English law of contract for the civil
lawyer. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Macdonald, E., Atkins, R., & Atkins, R. D. (2014). Koffman & Macdonald's Law of Contract. Oxford
University Press, USA.
McKendrick, E. (2014). Contract law: text, cases, and materials. Oxford University Press (UK).
O'Sullivan, J., & Hilliard, J. (2016). The law of contract. Oxford University Press.