CONTRACT LAW [1LAW412]
Bleu: plagiat / Gras: a developper
The question in this problem is concerned with the element of the contract called agreement. With whom Brenda is bound: Claire, David, or Andrew? To answer, we have to look at each relation to see if Brenda have made more than one contract for her car and see whether she can be sued. The issues arising in the problem like invitation to treat, the status of a promise to keep an offer open, revocation, the postal rule, etc….
The first issue is whether Brenda’s advertisement is an offer or an invitation to treat. According to the case Partridge v Crittenden, an advertisement is often an invitation to treat (ITT). However, an advertisement can be seen as an offer if the courts feel…show more content… Here, Brenda promises a car in exchange of money from the buyer. Consequently, if Brenda accepts the offer a buyer, there will be a unilateral contract.
Brenda v Andrew
Brenda’s situation is dependent on there being a contract between Andrew and Brenda and for Brenda to have breached that contract. If there is no contract the breach does not arise. OR Whether or no Andrew have a cause of action for damages for breach of contract depend on whether it exists an enforceable contract.
As the advertisement is an ITT, Andrew’s e-mail should be an offer, but is it valid? Offers have traditionally been defined by the courts as expressions of a willingness to enter into a legally binding contract on certain terms and manifest by words or conduct. Andrew has shown his wish to get the car in exchange of £50. The offer of Andrew is valid.
However, Brenda answered that she made a mistake which she has corrected on the website. Can she change the price on the website due to a mistake? The case Argos shows that if a website constitutes no more than an invitation to treat, misplacing will not result in the supplier having to fulfill a contract as the misquoted price. if the offers have not been accepted, there could be no binding contract of sale if the website constituted an invitation to teat. As the advertisement is an invitation to treat and not an acceptance from Brenda, there could be no binding contract of sale. As a result, Brenda can change the price