Business Law

_Mary wants to sell her house for $215.000; she didn't have any proposition until this young couple's offer ($170.000). Mary told to her agent that this price is out of the ZOPA, but she is ready to negotiation._

There is consideration present here since according to the ‘Doctrine of Consideration, ' promises will legally enforceable if you ‘ask for something in return for ' something else. Here, Ken asks for £12,000 in return for his work to build Jack 's conservatory. Therefore, when Jack ‘accordingly contacts Ken to say that he will be employing him to do the building work, ' Jack has accepted Ken 's offer, and both parties have entered into a legally binding contract. Jack 's statement qualifies as an acceptance since there is correspondence between the two parties, whereby both the offer and acceptance are on the same terms; there is nexus, where the acceptance is in response to the offer; and finally, there is communication on both parts. Moreover, when Jack states that he will accept the ‘most competitive ' tender, he could argue that the recommendation from ‘Barnie, ' his ‘neighbour ' who expresses that ‘Ken is an excellent builder ' constitutes Jack 's meaning of the ‘most competitive. ' However, this is not relevant unless Bob wishes to argue in court that Jack 's proposal was indeed an invitation to tender, which constitutes an offer, as according to Harvela.

Helen easily sells the San Francisco house in which she and Tom live. Helen is the sole owner of the house. However, she has a harder time finding the right home in Portland. Helen has to make several trips to Portland before buying a house under construction. It will not be available for

It is the summer of 1970 in Northern Ohio. The Hadley family is the wealthiest family out of all the families that populates the city of Toledo. They all live in a subdivision called Old Timbers Valley with mother, Lydia, father, George, and Peter and Wendy. The Darling family lives in a sky blue house on top of clouds, the Tremaine family lives in the old, enchanted house, and Old Man Geppetto lives in an Old-Italian village home. Unlike the others, the Hadley’s house is future realistic, full of technology. From lights turning on and off as one walks, stoves making food, sinks washing dishes, a nursey that illuminates the children’s imagination, and so many more laborless enhancements. The children’s nursey is called the Veldt, which can

She dialed the number. “Park County Realty, Vern Wilson speaking” the voice answered. Cheyenne identified herself and the property of interest. “Is it still available?” she inquired. “I’m sorry ma’am, that property is under contract just this morning. But I do believe a similar and even nicer property will be available soon. It’s across the valley a little bit and it’s really nice. I believe the asking price will be about $85,000.” Cheyenne asked if there were more similar properties available in the area. “Well ma’am, out here, “in the area” is a relative term. If you don’t have to be right in the valley, there are several others available in similar price ranges” the agent said. Cheyenne clarified her requirements and the agent affirmed “Yes ma’am, I think most of them would fit the bill.” “Let me get back to you in a few days. I would like to schedule a trip to see the properties” Cheyenne told him. “Just let me know when you’re coming. I will sure be delighted to show them to you ma’am” Vern replied. As she hung up the phone, Cheyenne felt as though she could conquer the

In Commercial Bank of Australia v Amadio 1, an elderly couple (Mr. and Mrs. Amadio) migrated to Australia forty year ago, without formal education and without a mastery of English, were persuaded by their son, Vincenzo to guarantee and mortgage to the bank a property they owned as security for the overdraft of their son’s company to the bank. They were misled into thinking that the liability was limited to $50000 and for half a year. When their son’s company failed, the bank tried to exercise power of sale under mortgage. The liability eventually turned out to be significantly higher because the guarantee was a continuing “all monies” guarantee which was not limited in time. The couple claimed that they would not have entered into the contract if they had known about the dire financial position of their son’s company. Furthermore, the bank did not ask them to seek legal advice prior to the signing of the contract. The majority of the High Court held that the mortgage ought to be set aside due to unconscionable conduct on the part of the bank.

I greeted Dan and we started to speak about the relationship I had with Mr. Frank Jones and how he was a good man. Then the topic smoothly shifted to the market value of the land near the Elm Street area. We were soon discussing about Lot 51 and I quoted a price of 6,500 dollars. Dan showed some disappointment with the price and explained how the market value of the land raised by 10% in six years. From his talking I could understand that he was expecting a more profitable price. In an amiable way I asked Dan of how much he was expecting for Lot 51. Instantly, he quoted 8000 dollars which was

The first issue to be addressed is whether Abigail’s advertisement for the collection was an offer or an invitation to treat; establishing this will aid our understanding of what Abigail’s position is in terms of her contractual obligation. Advertisements are mostly invitations to treat rather than an offer. The language of Abigail’s advertisement is imperative in trying to determine whether this is an invitation to treat or an offer. In the case, Gibson v Manchester City Council (1979), the council used the wording ‘might’ therefore the court held this advertisement to be an invitation to treat rather than an offer. Paradoxically, in Storer v Manchester City Council (1974) the title of the document read ‘agreement to sale’ therefore this constituted an offer. On balance, Abigail’s advertisement is more akin to that of Gibson v Manchester City Council insofar as she uses phrases such as ‘or near offer’ and ‘or, telephone me, if you prefer’.

Luke has been asked to work on a project that involves developing land recently bought by ABC to build an adult entertainment retail store. According to the plan, Luke’s brother, Owen, whom he is very close to, lives in the neighborhood that the adult entertainment retail store plan will be built. Luke knows that as soon as the plans for the store become public, the property value of the homes in Owen’s neighborhood are expected to decrease significantly. Luke is concerned about his confidentiality obligations to the company. Owen has openly expressed to Luke that he has thought about putting his home on the market for sale; this is concerning for Luke. He knows that Owen has received and acceptable offer for his home already, but wonders if the market for real estate in the area will increase in the next few years.

Residential real estate contracts have a condition precedent. The contract does not become binding until the property has been professional inspection. This makes sure that the

Lucy stayed in with her mother to help with the house cleaning. I rushed outside to work because I wanted to finish before it got dark. The house looked so empty and the yard had a ‘For Sale’ sign in it. I thought about buying the house, but I didn’t have any credit history. Jane had made a practical decision to sell the house.

There must be agreement in an enforceable contract. An offer is present if it appears to the reasonable person, in the position of the offeree, that an offer was intended. After Brie asked Kelvin for a quote, he replied with a quotation for $15000 including installation and delivery by 31 July 2016. He did not express to Brie that ‘I may be prepared to sell the fridge to you’ which conveys that he was not inviting her to negotiate for a contract. Rather, the reasonable person would view Kelvin’s email and act of ‘ordering’ the fridge as an indication that he intended to make an offer to sell and not an invitation to treat.

I have been asked to provide a legal opinion regarding whether Margaret’s arrangement with Frames for Less is legally enforceable, and also regarding the auction at St Francis College. The main issues I will cover in this opinion is whether Margaret’s arrangement with Frames for Less was a contract in the eyes of the law. I will look into whether Frames for Less’s letter was an offer, whether Margaret accepted this ‘offer’ and whether it was a valid contract. I concluded that Frames for Less did in fact make an offer to Margaret and she did accept this offer, so it was a valid contract. I will also determine whether the Girdler paintings were legally required to be in the auction at St Francis College by looking at whether the advertisement was an offer or an invitation to treat, I determined that the advertisement for the auction was an invitation to treat and that St Francis College were not legally required to sell the paintings.

Kyla’s parents put the house up for sale and they got a lot of people walking through looking at house to buy it. They got a lot of offers but they didn’t like the prices they offered them. Meanwhile Kyla and her friends were always hanging out. They were spending most of their time together. When the family got a good offer they met the couple. The couple seemed nice and were probably in their early twenties. They had a two year old little boy, they thought the house was perfect. The house had big back yard, a play set, and a pool. The buyers wanted to make an offer. Kyla’s parents liked the price that they offered. Lori and Scott accepted the offer.

A Contract requires several elements in order to be considered enforceable. However for the purpose of this essay we would explore one of these elements in order to effectively understand the controversial cases of Williams v Roffey Brothers and Nicholls (contractors) Ltd (1990) and Stilk v Myrick (1804). Before going any further one should briefly understand the doctrine of Consideration. Despite the vast amount of content written, the doctrine of consideration is still to this day unclear due to the inconsistency of the courts and its application of necessary rules. Consideration refers to that which the law deems as valuable in that the promisor receives from the promise that which was promised. In other words, it is the exchange of something of value between the parties in a contract. One should be mindful that in English law, every promise may not be legally enforceable; it requires the court to distinguish between are enforceable and non-enforceable obligations. This brings us to the controversial cases of Stilk v Myrick and Williams v the Roffery brothers. Many argue that that the case of Williams was wrongly decided leading to impairments in the rule initially established in Stilk v Myrick. This essay seek to analyse and critique the cases of Stilk v Myrick and Williams v Roffey Brothers and also highlight whether or not the new rule of Practical benefit lead to serious impairments in later cases.