Melanie*****
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 6 months ago
#1
Olive advertised in the "For Sale" column of the Classic Car Journal - "1949 Triumph Roadster. Good condition. 1-year MOT, £13,000". The advertisement gave her address and telephone number. Paul saw the advertisement on Friday night and immediately wrote to Olive at her home address, agreeing to pay the £13,000 requested. He posted the letter on Saturday morning. Quentin also saw the advertisement on Friday evening and telephoned. There was no reply, but he left a message on the answering machine agreeing to buy the car for the asking price. Olive, who had gone away for the weekend, returned on Monday morning. She picked up Paul's letter and read it whilst listening to the messages on her answering machine, including the message from Quentin. On Tuesday she decided that she did not want to sell the car at all.

The first part of the question is regarding the difference between an offer and an invitation to treat, I've confirmed that this is merely an invitation to treat, therefore no contractual obligation exists, however the next part of the question is this: Assuming a contract to sell the car exists, how does Olive avoid having to sell the car?

This question has really thrown me! I don't think there is a contract at all, so it's very difficult for me to assume that there is and, secondly, if we are able to assume that one exists then surely Olive would be unable to avoid her contractual obligations? What am I missing here?
0
reply
Catherine1973
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#2
Report 6 months ago
#2
Yep that question would throw me as well?
Who are we supposed to assume the valid contract t exists with? Paul or Quentin or both?

I know how to rescind a unilateral offer (or cases involving that sort of thing like rewards and you can’t just rescind if anyone had taken major steps to complete say a walk from London to Scotland) but is that what they want ? And both have fulfilled their part so too late to rescind here?
I can’t see any frustration here either? Or mistake or misrepresentation.

Odd question!
0
reply
james_law2.0
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#3
Report 6 months ago
#3
(Original post by Melanie*****)
Olive advertised in the "For Sale" column of the Classic Car Journal - "1949 Triumph Roadster. Good condition. 1-year MOT, £13,000". The advertisement gave her address and telephone number. Paul saw the advertisement on Friday night and immediately wrote to Olive at her home address, agreeing to pay the £13,000 requested. He posted the letter on Saturday morning. Quentin also saw the advertisement on Friday evening and telephoned. There was no reply, but he left a message on the answering machine agreeing to buy the car for the asking price. Olive, who had gone away for the weekend, returned on Monday morning. She picked up Paul's letter and read it whilst listening to the messages on her answering machine, including the message from Quentin. On Tuesday she decided that she did not want to sell the car at all.

The first part of the question is regarding the difference between an offer and an invitation to treat, I've confirmed that this is merely an invitation to treat, therefore no contractual obligation exists, however the next part of the question is this: Assuming a contract to sell the car exists, how does Olive avoid having to sell the car?

This question has really thrown me! I don't think there is a contract at all, so it's very difficult for me to assume that there is and, secondly, if we are able to assume that one exists then surely Olive would be unable to avoid her contractual obligations? What am I missing here?
There is no question to answer, what actually is the question that relates to the facts you have provide?

(Original post by Catherine1973)
Yep that question would throw me as well?
Who are we supposed to assume the valid contract t exists with? Paul or Quentin or both?

I know how to rescind a unilateral offer (or cases involving that sort of thing like rewards and you can’t just rescind if anyone had taken major steps to complete say a walk from London to Scotland) but is that what they want ? And both have fulfilled their part so too late to rescind here?
I can’t see any frustration here either? Or mistake or misrepresentation.

Odd question!
This is a very straight forward scenario (in my opinion)
0
reply
Catherine1973
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#4
Report 6 months ago
#4
(Original post by Melanie*****)
however the next part of the question is this: Assuming a contract to sell the car exists, how does Olive avoid having to sell the car?

?
Isn’t this bit the second part of the question that the poster had issues with?
1
reply
Melanie*****
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#5
Report Thread starter 6 months ago
#5
The next part of the question is the bit I'm struggling with: Assuming a contract to sell the car exists, how does Olive avoid having to sell the car?

This question has really thrown me! I don't think there is a contract at all, so it's very difficult for me to assume that there is and, secondly, if we are able to assume that one exists then surely Olive would be unable to avoid her contractual obligations? What am I missing here?
0
reply
james_law2.0
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#6
Report 6 months ago
#6
(Original post by Catherine1973)
Isn’t this bit the second part of the question that the poster had issues with?
I have completely missed that part, i'll re read and re read your comments too.
0
reply
james_law2.0
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#7
Report 6 months ago
#7
(Original post by Melanie*****)
The next part of the question is the bit I'm struggling with: Assuming a contract to sell the car exists, how does Olive avoid having to sell the car?
Right I've read it all properly now, still half asleep!

How much of contract law have you learnt so far as that is going to really dictate what you talk about.
0
reply
Melanie*****
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#8
Report Thread starter 6 months ago
#8
(Original post by james_law2.0)
Right I've read it all properly now, still half asleep!

How much of contract law have you learnt so far as that is going to really dictate what you talk about.
I'm currently studying a level 4 Diploma in Legal Studies and am completing my final assessment on the contract law module.
0
reply
Audrey18
Badges: 21
#9
Report 6 months ago
#9
(Original post by james_law2.0)
I have completely missed that part, i'll re read and re read your comments too.
(Original post by james_law2.0)
Right I've read it all properly now, still half asleep!

How much of contract law have you learnt so far as that is going to really dictate what you talk about.
imagine if you were a barrister before a judge and a judge had to correct you on your understanding of a piece of material which you did not read in its entirety and you told him that the reason you bungled it was because you were half asleep. what do you think the judge would remark? no prizes for guessing correctly

Melanie*****

the question you've been set looks really difficult. its tougher than the ones set by the tops unis. i'm certain of it.
0
reply
james_law2.0
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#10
Report 6 months ago
#10
(Original post by Audrey18)
imagine if you were a barrister before a judge and a judge had to correct you on your understanding of a piece of material which you did not read in its entirety and you told him that the reason you bungled it was because you were half asleep. what do you think the judge would remark? no prizes for guessing correctly

Melanie*****

the question you've been set looks really difficult. its tougher than the ones set by the tops unis. i'm certain of it.
Your first analogy is not really comparable. I obviously would not be sleeping in til half ten on a standard day nor telling the judge the reason why my lack of incompetence was due to sleep deprivation etc.

I've seen many questions like this in the 'mid' universities. It's not really difficult at all.
0
reply
Melanie*****
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#11
Report Thread starter 6 months ago
#11
(Original post by james_law2.0)
Your first analogy is not really comparable. I obviously would not be sleeping in til half ten on a standard day nor telling the judge the reason why my lack of incompetence was due to sleep deprivation etc.

I've seen many questions like this in the 'mid' universities. It's not really difficult at all.
Would you mind pointing me in the right direction please James? As I mentioned, I'm completing a level 4 diploma, certainly not at degree-level yet, so a few tips would be appreciated.
0
reply
Catherine1973
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#12
Report 6 months ago
#12
They probably mean something simple for the second part. It’s the sort of strange question I’d often see in tutorial work where we would just briefly discuss the issues. Is this an actual exam question or piece of coursework? Or just a tutorial question.
0
reply
Melanie*****
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#13
Report Thread starter 6 months ago
#13
(Original post by Catherine1973)
They probably mean something simple for the second part. It’s the sort of strange question I’d often see in tutorial work where we would just briefly discuss the issues. Is this an actual exam question or piece of coursework? Or just a tutorial question.
It's a final assessment question for this module but it is only worth 5 marks, so you might be right - thanks for your help.
0
reply
james_law2.0
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#14
Report 6 months ago
#14
(Original post by Melanie*****)
The first part of the question is regarding the difference between an offer and an invitation to treat, I've confirmed that this is merely an invitation to treat, therefore no contractual obligation exists, however the next part of the question is this: Assuming a contract to sell the car exists, how does Olive avoid having to sell the car?

This question has really thrown me! I don't think there is a contract at all, so it's very difficult for me to assume that there is and, secondly, if we are able to assume that one exists then surely Olive would be unable to avoid her contractual obligations? What am I missing here?
I agree there is no contract in the first instance between either Paul or Quentin on the basis there was never an offer only an invitation to treat. You would need to fully cover the grey areas when a ITT becomes an offer.

The second part is that you now have to assume there is a contract in place. I'll quickly explain the position should you come to the conclusion she cannot avoid either contract, the worst case is she doesn't fulfil either contract and is in breach of both. Best case is she fulfils one and still is in breach of contract.

If you have a contract in place then all the requirements of a contract have been fulfilled; offer, acceptance, consideration, intention to create legal relations and capacity. I'm not going to go into detail but here is a link when you can terminate the contract.
https://hallellis.co.uk/termination-contracts/
Last edited by james_law2.0; 6 months ago
2
reply
Catherine1973
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#15
Report 6 months ago
#15
I found quite a lot of the questions where quite vague.
You were given a scenario like hire a car not fit for purpose and everyone says sue for breach etc but no where had anyone actually first asked the car hire place to fix issue and then go onto sue if they refuse. It’s a bit separate from real world practice.
0
reply
james_law2.0
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#16
Report 6 months ago
#16
(Original post by Catherine1973)
I found quite a lot of the questions where quite vague.
You were given a scenario like hire a car not fit for purpose and everyone says sue for breach etc but no where had anyone actually first asked the car hire place to fix issue and then go onto sue if they refuse. It’s a bit separate from real world practice.
Most questions are made ambiguous for a reason, its to make you think and also to discuss a wider part of the law which will showcase your understanding of the material you have covered.

With pretty much all parts of litigation and in general, you should always ask the other side, whether this be setting aside a judgement or as you say, asking the other side to fix something. Academia is different to real life, while legal principles still apply it is different; you would never write a full essay and give it to the client, they just want the answer not how you get to it.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Do you have the space and resources you need to succeed in home learning?

Yes I have everything I need (288)
55.71%
I don't have everything I need (229)
44.29%

Watched Threads

View All