+1-817-968-5551
+61-488-839-671
+44-7480-542904About Expert
Key Topics
Requirement
Question 1: Advise to Connor
Solution
The notice to sell the car was displayed on the windscreen of the car that was parked outside the house. Since the notice was on public display, so the offer was made to anyone who read it. It was not for any particular person, but it was for anyone who was willing to buy it at the stated price or any price nearby to the stated price. Connor also provided his contact number so that the interested people could easily contact him.
In the case of Dolly, Connor did not promise to sell his car; he just said that he would consider her price quote as she quoted a lesser price than the price at which Connor was willing to sell. But by afternoon, it was decided by Connor that he would sell his car to Dolly at the price quoted by her. So in this case, the offer is made by Dolly and Connor had to accept it as he has to consider the price. To tell this to Dolly, he wrote an acceptance letter and the letter was received by Dolly on Wednesday morning. However, when he saw Eileen’s note, he changed his mind and communicated to Dolly that he did not want to sell his car. But the communication of revocation of the acceptance was completed on Wednesday evening. Thus, Connor has entered into the contract with Dolly. He will have to fulfill his contractual obligations with Dolly.
In contract act, the acceptance can be revoked before the communication of acceptance is completed . But, when the communication of acceptance and the revocation of acceptance are received simultaneously, the thing which is read first is considered. The communication of acceptance which was sent by Connor was completed on Wednesday morning, but revocation was received in the Evening of Wednesday. Therefore, he has entered into a contract with Dolly and is liable to Dolly for the sale of a car.
The above assignment sample may assist you in better understanding the Legal Aspects You can always get law assignment help from Allassignmenthelp.com expert assignment helpers. Whether you require tort law assignment help or criminal law assignment help, we are always available to assist you. You can contact us at any time; we are only a phone call away.
Advise to Dolly
Dolly say the notice, and she communicated to Connor that she would buy the car but for $23000. She was being responded by Connor that he will think about it/consider it. On the same day, she was delivered a letter that Connor was willing to sell the car at ‘her terms’. This scenario shows that Dolly made an offer to Connor, and he accepted her offer.
In the contract act, when the proposal is made to somebody, it can be revoked before the acceptance is made by the other person . But in this case, the acceptance was made by Connor when he said that she would sell the car for $23000. Also, though Connor said that he would consider the price, he also agreed to sell it for $23000 and sent a letter to Dolly stating the same. The letter was received by her on Wednesday afternoon, and the contract was made then only. Though Connor revoked it on Monday afternoon, but the revocation reached Dolly on Wednesday evening. When the communication of acceptance and the revocation of acceptance are received simultaneously, the thing which is read first is considered. The communication of acceptance which was sent by Connor was completed on Wednesday morning, but revocation was received in the Evening of Wednesday. Therefore, he has entered into a contract with Dolly and is liable to Dolly for the sale of a car.
So, in case Connor does not fulfill his obligation of the contract and refuses to sell the car to Dolly, she can sue him for non-performance of the contract. She could claim the damages if she suffered any. She can even ask Connor to deliver the car to her as he promised to do that. Dolly will be the aggrieved party if Connor refuses to sell the car to her.
Advise to Eileen
When Connor displayed the notice on the car, Eileen read it and called at number 48 but when he could not talk to the owner of the car, she left the note of acceptance of Connor’s offer stating that she wants the car, and she was also ready to pay the entire amount that was asked by Connor. She left the cheque of $26000 at his house. This note and the cheque were kept at Connor’s study by his daughter. Now, the note was kept by Eileen in the morning, but Connor read it in the afternoon on the same day. The communication of acceptance by Eileen was completed when Connor saw the note. Eileen also paid for the car as she left the cheque along with the note.
Whenever an advertisement or notice is displayed in any public announcement which intends to sell something like the car, in this case, it is considered as an intention of the offer and the person who accepts it does not come into a contract with the company or person who advertises .
So, Eileen id advised taking her money back as Connor has not entered into a contract with her. It was on public display, and if Eileen accepted the offer, the contract did not form. Also, he already entered into the contract with Dolly because he accepted her offer first and then he saw the note by Eileen later. If Eileen wants to but the car, then either she can convince Connor that he should cancel his contract with Dolly, or she can take her money back and buy the car from some other seller. Eileen cannot do anything legally because the contract was not made. She left the cheque by herself, as she wished to, Connor never asked the accepters of the offer to pay him first and then take the car or to pay immediately. Eileen did it because she wanted the car and she did not want Connor to sell it to someone else, but unfortunately, it was already sold. So, in this case, Eileen cannot do anything, she should take her money back.
Advise to Fiona
Fiona saw the notice in the afternoon on Monday. So, she posted a letter that stated that she wants to purchase the car for $26000. Also, she sent a cheque along with the letter. The letter was posted on the same day, but the letter was posted on the wrong address. But the letter arrived on the correct address on Friday. Fiona cannot do anything in this case because she did not enter into any valid contract with Connor. The letter reached Connor very late. Till that time, he already entered into a contract with someone else. If Fiona wanted to enter into the contract with Connor, she could have made an immediate reply of acceptance of the offer. The contract is not made in this case because the acceptance was not communicated to the offeror on time and thus the contract could not be entered into .
In Crawley v Rex, there was a seller who displayed a notice outside his shop for selling a product and the offer was open to the general public . But a customer came, and he accepted to take more than the available quantity of goods. So it was held that there was no contract made between the seller and the customer as the notice did not make the seller binding to sell the product. It was mere an announcement of his intention to sell the product.
So, referring to this case, it can be said that Fiona cannot do anything in this case against Connor. He is not liable to sell the car to anybody who comes and demands it. He will sell only to that person with whom he has entered into a contract, or he wishes to. So Connor does not have any liability against Fiona.
Question 2
Part 1
The services of Toff Dry Cleaners have been used by Dan and his family for a long time. So, he had trust in the services and the company. When he gave the dinner suit and the dress to them for dry-cleaning, he was given a docket that clearly stated that the company is not responsible for the loss and damage to the clothes that are given to them for cleaning. Also, the dry cleaners displayed in their shop that they take care of the dry cleaning, but they are not responsible for the safety and damage of the clothes. Dan found that the dry cleaners had lost his dinner suit, and they have damaged the dress of his wife.
Dan is entitled to compensation in this case because the dry cleaners and such firms are required to take care of the clothes that have been given to them in a reasonable manner. The customers are entitled to claim the damages if they misplace the clothes, or they damage them during cleaning. The signboard that displays that they are not responsible for loss or damage is not true because that is the implied condition of the contract. They need not say or write it that if the customers are giving them clothes, then they will just take care of the cleaning and not for the right placement and quality of the clothes. The dry cleaners are not allowed to opt-out of the responsibility of taking care of the garments when the customers give their garments to them. Just by putting up a sign in their shops, the dry cleaners cannot get a waiver from this implied responsibility. If they are mentioning anything like this in their docket or putting up a sign which says that they are not responsible for the loss or damage, then it is considered as an unfair term, and they are still held liable for the loss or damage.
If the clothes that the customers have given to the dry cleaners have been lost or damaged, then they are subject to the compensation. Also, they cannot be given new clothes in place of the old ones that they deposited for cleaning as that is also considered to be unfair. The damages are given according to the age of the garment, its condition, and quality and accordingly, a fair settlement is reached upon. For example, there was a pant and shirt set that got damaged during the process of dry cleaning and the pant and the shirt set was an exclusive one, either of the cloth cannot be worn with any other garment. So, in this case, the dry cleaner will have to pay the entire amount to the customer as his damage is not just for one cloth, his entire set has been damaged so he is liable to receive the damage for the entire set of garment . Also, when the garment is lost, like it is given to some other party by mistake and it is not possible for the dry-cleaning firm to recover the garment, then they have to compensate to the consumer accordingly.
Based on the above discussion, it can be said that Dan is definitely entitled to receive the compensation from Toff Dry Cleaners. When he gave the dinner suit and the dress to them for dry-cleaning, they were in proper condition and were not damaged at all. He was given a docket that clearly stated that the company is not responsible for the loss and damage to the clothes that are given to them for cleaning. But this term was unfair and unreasonable. So, even if Dan did not read it, it does not make a difference as these basic things are implied in the contract. If the customer is handing over the clothes for dry cleaning, then the firm has to take full responsibility for the clothes. Also, the dry cleaners displayed in their shop that they take care of the dry cleaning, but they are not responsible for the safety and damage of the clothes. This is again unreasonable. They displayed it at the backside which means they had the intention to cheat the customer otherwise they would have themselves made this point clear to the customers. Dan found that the dry cleaners had lost his dinner suit, and they have damaged the dress of his wife. So, he is entitled to the compensation.
Part 2
If Dan would have noticed the clause and the assistant of the firm would have told him that the damage to buttons and zippers was not covered in it then also it would not have made any difference because no matter what damage is made to the clothes, whether the damage is done to the buttons, zips, color, design, etc. of the cloth, the dry cleaning firm is still responsible if any damage is done during the course of the cleaning . They cannot simply say that they will be responsible only for the buttons and the zippers of the cloth, and they will not be responsible for any other damage to the cloth and save themselves from the liability. When customers gave then the garment, then they are fully responsible for it, no matter what.
Place Order For A Top Grade Assignment Now
We have some amazing discount offers running for the students
Place Your OrderPart 3
Due to the loss of dinner suit and the damage to the dress of Dan's wife, they had to spend extra money on buying the new dress on hire and also, Dan's wife suffered from emotional distress as the dress that got damaged was their family heirloom.
In this case, Dan is entitled to the compensation to the extent of extra cost that he had to incur due to the problem caused by the damage of dress and the loss of suit. The financial costs, the loss of time and productivity has to be compensated. However, since it is difficult o calculate the emotional distress in monetary terms, so, it is a bit difficult to compensate the emotional distress. The compensation is to be given for these extra costs incurred by the customers because it should put the customer in a position that he would have been if he was not borne the damage. The compensation has to be given for all the cost that was incurred by the customers related to the damage or the business of the dry cleaners.
Based on the above discussion, it can be said that Dan will get compensation for all the things mentioned above as he incurred extra costs due to the loss and damage.
Give your grades a boost
Just share your requirements and get customized solutions on time.
-
1,168,768 Orders
-
4.9/5 Overall Rating
-
5,052 Experts
