Law Question Analysis - Case Study Example

Law Case Study Question 1 The legal status of the newspaper advertisement like the one placed by Arthur on advertising for the sale of a car, is that of an invitation to treat. In the English contract law, an invitation to treat refers to the action of individuals placing information at the disposal of other parties, to the effect that the individuals would want to negotiate the terms of offer of sale of the goods or services for which the newspaper advertisement has been made1. In this respect therefore, a newspaper advertisement placed by an individual stating the sale of a product and the terms of sale therein does not amount to a binding contract, but rather an invitation for the parties interested in the product offered to make an offer. Therefore, the individual advertising the product is not bound by the law to enter into a contract with the parties that respond to this advertisement offer2. This simply means that the advertiser is at liberty to enter into a contract with the individuals who expresses interest or not, based on the choices of the advertiser. The case of invitation to treat was demonstrated by the ruling under Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists, in which the court clarified the difference between an invitation to treat and an offer for sale3. The courts clarified that the display of products on a shelf or the advertisement of sale of a product in a newspaper simply amounts to an invitation to treat, which is simply the notification to invite the public to make their offers, without any legal liability on the side of the advertiser or the exhibitioner who has displayed the goods on the shelves. Question 2 Rodney The English contract law provides that the advertiser of good or products for sale through a newspaper is under duty to scrutinize the offers that have been tendered by the interested parties, if such offers are made before the expiry of the deadline that has been set by the advertisement, and without any variation in the offers4. In this respect, Arthur is under duty to scrutinize the letter of offer that was submitted by Rodney, failure to which he is liable for having breached the terms of the contract. This is because, after reading the advertisement on the newspaper, Rodney sent the necessary letter of offer and the required amount, and they were received by Arthur at 9:50 am Monday as required by the advertisement. Therefore, Arthur should sell the car to Rodney. Thelma Arthur cannot sell the car to Thelma and he is not under any legal obligation to fulfill the contract with her. This is because, when Thelma saw the advertisement, she tendered a counter offer by submitting a cheque of cheque for £7,250, as opposed to the cheque for £7,500 that was required by the advertisement. This simply amounts to a counter offer under the English contract law, where an individual issues an offer that is different and that is varying the actual terms that were in the original contract notification5. The English contract law provides that under the situation of a counter offer, the contract terms have been varied, and thus the individual asking for the offers from the interested parties cannot be legally bound to accept that offer. Del Arthur is not under any legal obligation to sell the car to Del. This is because, when the advertisement required that the interested parties should tender their offers in one day, which was starting on Sunday and ending on Monday, Del requested for the extension of the deadline to Tuesday. Despite the fact that Arthur had agreed to extend the deadline, the request made by Del amounted to a variation of the terms of contract6, since she did not meet the required deadline. Therefore, Arthur is not legally bound to consider the offer made by Del. Louise In the case of Louise, neither is Arthur nor Louise under any legal obligation to fulfill the contract. This is because; Louise made a counter offer by offering g to pay £8,000, even though she later negated the payment and decided not to buy the car. The variation of the terms of a contract amounts to a counter offer, and the individual offering to sale a product or service is not bound to accept the offer7. Question 3 Considering the facts of the story, there is only one party who has a legal remedy. Rodney has a legal claim to the sale of the car, since he tendered his offer without varying g the terms and within the required deadline. Therefore, the legal remedy available to Rodney are specific performance which entails the courts requiring Arthur to deliver the car to Rodney8, or the payment of damages for the breach of contract, where Rodney will received back his £7,500 and any other additional fine charged on Arthur as the courts deems necessary. Del, Louise and Thelma have no legal claim because all of them varied the terms of the offer by issuing a counter offer9. Arthur has no legal remedy because he cannot force Louise to pay the £8,000, since it amounts to variation of the terms of offer, through the increment of the amount, and the variation of the deadline from Monday to Tuesday. Bibliography 1. Section 57 (2) of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 2. Pharmaceutical Society v Boots Cash Chemists [1953] EWCA Civ 6 3. Fisher v Bell [1961] 1 QB 394 4. Partridge v Crittenden [1968] 1 WLR 1204 Read More