Howard Inlet Case
Howard Inlet had posted advertisements to sell his car at various locations around Armidale. Howard provides details of the car, such as make, model and year of manufacture. Further to this Howard provides his email address, mobile number and home address to contact him for interest. Due to the advertisements Howard received two offers, one from Simon Scott and another from Clair Wilson. Additionally, Howard’s car is needing repairs so he approaches Raffi for a quote.
The wording surrounding the price 'I may be prepared to sell the car for $5000', indicates that Howard has created an invitation to treat not an offer. Howard, therefore is inviting people to make an offer but has no intention of being bound by that offer unless he chooses …show more content…
Contractually, intent in the first quote would be found as it is a commercial agreement, for the quote to not be considered legally binding it must clearly be identified before the commencement of the agreement. Despite this, Raffi called Howard and told him the job was no longer a repair job and instead required a replacement. Howard agreed over the phone to this as he needed the job completed. Intent is further seen in the second instance as Raffi had already sourced the part from Sydney so he had every intention of following through on the replacement should Howard …show more content…
An aspect of this is that the contract must contain essential terms. Essential terms being terms that would otherwise make a contract unenforceable should they be omitted[20]. In Howard's case, the certainty comes from the price given for the completion of the job.
If a contract with a person lacking contractual capacity is made the contract is generally voidable[21]. With the classes of lacking contractual capacity of a person who is mentally disordered, intoxicated and considered minors[22]. In this case Howard is not classified as minor, assumed not mentally disordered nor intoxicated as such in terms of capacity Howard's contract would be bound.
Not all contracts are in writing, verbal agreements too are enforceable[23]. The idea being that meeting all requirements of a contract can make it enforceable. As Howard and Raffi have met the criteria for all other aspects the phone call between Raffi and Howard would create a binding agreement.
As it stands Howard is contractually bound to pay Raffi $500 to replace the bumper as that was the last agreed upon
The wording surrounding the price 'I may be prepared to sell the car for $5000', indicates that Howard has created an invitation to treat not an offer. Howard, therefore is inviting people to make an offer but has no intention of being bound by that offer unless he chooses …show more content…
Contractually, intent in the first quote would be found as it is a commercial agreement, for the quote to not be considered legally binding it must clearly be identified before the commencement of the agreement. Despite this, Raffi called Howard and told him the job was no longer a repair job and instead required a replacement. Howard agreed over the phone to this as he needed the job completed. Intent is further seen in the second instance as Raffi had already sourced the part from Sydney so he had every intention of following through on the replacement should Howard …show more content…
An aspect of this is that the contract must contain essential terms. Essential terms being terms that would otherwise make a contract unenforceable should they be omitted[20]. In Howard's case, the certainty comes from the price given for the completion of the job.
If a contract with a person lacking contractual capacity is made the contract is generally voidable[21]. With the classes of lacking contractual capacity of a person who is mentally disordered, intoxicated and considered minors[22]. In this case Howard is not classified as minor, assumed not mentally disordered nor intoxicated as such in terms of capacity Howard's contract would be bound.
Not all contracts are in writing, verbal agreements too are enforceable[23]. The idea being that meeting all requirements of a contract can make it enforceable. As Howard and Raffi have met the criteria for all other aspects the phone call between Raffi and Howard would create a binding agreement.
As it stands Howard is contractually bound to pay Raffi $500 to replace the bumper as that was the last agreed upon