Contract law of text cases and materials - Myassignmenthelp.Com

Question: Discuss about the Contract law of text cases and materials. Answer: Issue The legal issue which have been identified in this case is that whether all essentials of a valid contract have been met or not in relation to the agreement between David and his father for a rent lease Rules There are four most essential elements of a contract which are to be applied to this case study for the purpose of analyzing the issue. These are the elements of offer, acceptance, intentional to create a legal obligation and consideration. Offer As defined by McKendrick (2014) an expression made by one party to another to bind them to its terms legally is known as an offer[1]. There are several criteria for analyzing whether a valid offer has been made or not. These criteria have been mainly formulated to distinguish between an offer and invitation to an offer. An offer has to compete in the context of the transaction. For instance an offer in relation to the sale of goods must contain terms like price, quality, date of delivery of the goods and validity of the offer. In case such terms are not present in an offer it would be incomplete and be regarded as an invitation to treat as it was in the landmark case of AGC (Advances) Ltd v McWhirter[2]. Acceptance The next stage which is used to analyze the formation of a valid contract after a valid offer has been identified is the element of acceptance. Only a person who has been provided with the offer has the legal right to make an acceptance. There are several requirements which need to be met in order to establish that the acceptance is valid. Firstly the acceptance has to be unequivocal or unchanged. The terms of the offer has to be accepted completely by the acceptor. In case there is any alteration other than mere request for information then it would be considered as a counter offer which would defeat the original offer[3]. In addition an acceptance has to be communicated to the person who has made the offer in the specific form if any which has been provided by such person. The concept in relation to acceptance has been provided in the case of Hyde v Wrench[4]. Intention to create legal obligation No contract can be formed unless there is an intention between the parties to the agreement to make the agreement legally binding upon each other. However whether such intention was present when the contract had been entered does not depend upon what the parties provide about it, rather it is analyzed objectively by the court[5]. Thus intention of the parties in a contract is objective rather than subjective. The concept had been discussed in the case of Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company[6]where it was ruled by the court that in order to determine presence of intention in an agreement a seasonable person is placed in the position of the plaintiff and then it is analyzed that whether such person would have reasonable assumed that intention of the other party is present in the contract. Intention is one of the most vital and complex element in relation to the formation of a valid contract. Where there is an agreement between the parties who are related to each other it is deemed that such an agreement lacks the intention of creating a legal obligation as it has been stated in the case of Balfour v Balfour[7]. On the other hand in case of commercial agreements it is deemed that there in an intention to create a legal obligation in relation to the parties as stated in the case of Jones v Vernons Pools[8]. However both the assumption can be rebutted if proper evidence is provided by the parties which are able to provide that the intention is present or absent respectively as discussed in the case of Merritt v Merritt[9]. When it comes to a lease of a property the agreement entered upon by the parties to the contract has to be in writing for the purpose of being legally enforceable by courts[10]. A contract may be oral or in writing, however a contract to lease cannot be executed if it is not recorded in writing. These principles had been discussed in the landmark case of Lensen v. Lensen[11]. Doctrine of Part Performance The case had also discussed the doctrine of part performance which is an exception to this rule. This is a form of equitable doctrine which has been incorporated into common law in order to provide protection to a party who has done a significant performance in relation to a contract which has not been signed. In case it has been found that a party to the contract has performed a considerable act in relation to the contract which has not been formally completed, the contract is found to be fully executable if the agreement was complete between the parties. Application In the given situation it has been provided that David Lord wants to start a tax consultancy. In order to pursue such wishes he has told his father about his aspirations. This can be treated as an invitation to an offer. In the context of the invitation his father (Lan Lord) has made an offer to him towards renting one of his properties at half the rent. The offer has been accepted unequivocally by David and such acceptance has been communicated to his father. In the given situation it can be said that the elements of offer and acceptance has been met. It has been provided by the case that Lan has provided his property to David at half the cost. In relation to the rules of consideration it has been stated that a consideration has to be present in the contract even if it is less. The consideration (Half rent) is therefore present between the agreement between Lan and David. It has been discussed in the above rules that when there is a domestic agreement intention to create a legal relationship is said not to be present. However as per the case of Merritt v Merritt the presumption can be rebutted and the onus of proof is on the person who asserts that the intention is present. In addition it has been discussed above that the intention of the parties to an agreement is determined in an objective manner rather than subjective. In the given situation any reasonable person placed in the position of David would assume that there in an intention of creating a legal obligation on the part of Lan based in the nature and context of their agreement. This is because if it was a domestic agreement there would have been no question of a lease formation or a rent. Therefore it can be said that intention to create a legal obligation is present in relation to Lan for the rent lease. Form the above discussion it is clear that all elements of a contract had been established between the David and Lan which are offer, acceptance, consideration and Intention to create legal obligation. However according to the statue of fraud it has been stated that a contract for the lease of a property has to be in writing. It has been provided through the scenario that the although a lease agreement has been formed it has not been signed and executed by the Lan who kept of delaying it. Thus it can be stated that a valid contract has not been formed between the parties and the assertion of Lan that there is no contract between them as the lease has not been signed is correct. However, it has been discussed above that there is an exception to the rule provided by the statue of fraud which is the doctrine of part performance. In the given situation there had been several attempts made by David to ensure that the lease is signed. However the lease was actually not signed by Lan. The court in order to apply the doctrine of part performance in this case has to analyze that there has been some performance done by David in relation to the lease agreement. It has been provided by the scenario that the property in context required modification in order to be suitable for Davids use. David has received a quotation of$25000 in relation to such modification. He approached Lan to sign the deal but he was told by Lan to carry on with the modification and the lease would be signed later by them. Accordingly, David carried out such modification paying for its cost. In the given situation as discussed by the case of Lensen v. Lensen the doctrine of part performance would intervene. This is because David has carried out a significant act in relation to the contract. Thus the court would rule in favor of David and make the contract executable legally even where it has not been signed. Conclusion Therefore although there would have not been a contract between David and Lan based in the principles of statue of fraud, the doctrine of part performance would intervene and the case would be ruled in favor of David. Bibliography AGC (Advances) Ltd v McWhirter (1977) 1 BLR 9454. Andrews, Neil.Contract law. Cambridge University Press, 2015. Balfour v Balfour [1919] 2 KB 571 Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company [1893] 1 QB 256 Hyde v Wrench [1840] EWHC Ch J90. Jones v Vernons Pools [1938] 2 All ER 626. Lensen v. Lensen, [1987] 2 S.C.R. 672 McKendrick, Ewan.Contract law: text, cases, and materials. Oxford University Press (UK), 2014. Merritt v Merritt [1970] EWCA Civ 6. Poole, Jill.Textbook on contract law. Oxford University Press, 2016. Willmott, Lindy, et al. "Contract law." (2013). [1]McKendrick, Ewan.Contract law: text, cases, and materials. Oxford University Press (UK), 2014. [2] (1977) 1 BLR 9454 [3]Poole, Jill.Textbook on contract law. Oxford University Press, 2016. [4] [1840] EWHC Ch J90 [5]Willmott, Lindy, et al. "Contract law." (2013). [6] [1893] 1 QB 256 [7] [1919] 2 KB 571 [8] [1938] 2 All ER 626 [9] [1970] EWCA Civ 6 [10]Andrews, Neil.Contract law. Cambridge University Press, 2015. [11] [1987] 2 S.C.R. 672