Common law assignment
Is there a valid contract between Michael and Matt? Give reasons.
Counter offer and method of acceptance by silence.
An offer has been made by Michael to sell his 2008 BMW car for the price of $19,500.00 to Matt. Whether or not there has been a valid contract between the offeree and the offeree is still in question. The first issue is whether Matt’s reply was a counter offer or a request for further information on whether or not Michael would change the upholstery in the car before sale. If it was a counter offer, as was held in Hyde Vs Wrench (1840) 3 BEAV 3341, this would have amounted to a negation of the previous offer to the new offer of $20,500. Therefore there would not have been a contract between Michael and Matt. If it was a request for further information, as in Stevenson, Jaques & co v McLean (1880) 5 QBD 3462, the offer could have still been opened and accepted by Matt. In my opinion Matt asked Michael whether or not if he would be prepared to change the upholstery and nowhere in the case study does it state that Matt made a counter offer on the BMW by the language he used and in fact Michael was the one who made the counter offer and presumed that Matt would accept it.
The next issue that comes up is whether or not Matt did accept the offer or if acceptance did not occur. In the case study it is stated that after Michael revoked the original offer and provided a new offer of 20,500, matt said nothing. Silence is not a form of acceptance as was held in Felthouse Vs Bindley (1862) 11 CBNS 8693. The case clearly indicates that a person who makes an offer, cannot impose a bargain on the other merely by stating that silence indicates consent4. In conclusion as Matt did not in anyway, shape or form accept the offer, and was silent when the offer was made the contract between Michael and Matt is invalid.
As between Michael and Matt, is promissory estoppel relevant? Give reasons.
Is promissory Estoppel
Counter offer and method of acceptance by silence.
An offer has been made by Michael to sell his 2008 BMW car for the price of $19,500.00 to Matt. Whether or not there has been a valid contract between the offeree and the offeree is still in question. The first issue is whether Matt’s reply was a counter offer or a request for further information on whether or not Michael would change the upholstery in the car before sale. If it was a counter offer, as was held in Hyde Vs Wrench (1840) 3 BEAV 3341, this would have amounted to a negation of the previous offer to the new offer of $20,500. Therefore there would not have been a contract between Michael and Matt. If it was a request for further information, as in Stevenson, Jaques & co v McLean (1880) 5 QBD 3462, the offer could have still been opened and accepted by Matt. In my opinion Matt asked Michael whether or not if he would be prepared to change the upholstery and nowhere in the case study does it state that Matt made a counter offer on the BMW by the language he used and in fact Michael was the one who made the counter offer and presumed that Matt would accept it.
The next issue that comes up is whether or not Matt did accept the offer or if acceptance did not occur. In the case study it is stated that after Michael revoked the original offer and provided a new offer of 20,500, matt said nothing. Silence is not a form of acceptance as was held in Felthouse Vs Bindley (1862) 11 CBNS 8693. The case clearly indicates that a person who makes an offer, cannot impose a bargain on the other merely by stating that silence indicates consent4. In conclusion as Matt did not in anyway, shape or form accept the offer, and was silent when the offer was made the contract between Michael and Matt is invalid.
As between Michael and Matt, is promissory estoppel relevant? Give reasons.
Is promissory Estoppel