Confirmation Of The Offer By The Offered †Myassignmenrhelp.Com

Questions: Whether any contract is formed, if yes, when the same was formed and with whom? Bernards legal position and remedies? Charlenes legal position and remedies? Damiens legal position and remedies? Types of alternate dispute resolution technique and their respective pros and cons? Answers: Introducation The contract is an agreement which can be enforceable in law provided it comprises of all the contract essentials (RBC Properties Pte Ltd v Defu Furniture Pte Ltd , [2014] ). The main contract essentials are:(Advice, 2012) An offer is a contract ingredient which is made by an offeror to an offeree according to which proposals with defined term are made and it is desired that the offeree will approve the offer (Woo Kah Wai v Chew Ai Hua Sandra , [2014]). When the offer comes in the notion of offeree then it is complete(Daniel John Brader and others v Commerzbank AG, 2013).(Goh, Lee, Tham, 2014) An acceptance is the confirmation of the offer by the offeree. The acceptance should correspond to the terms of the offer in order to be valid. It is the offeree who should accept the offer. Confirmation by any other person is not an acceptance in law(Midlink Development Pte Ltd v The Stansfield Group Pte Ltd, 2004). When the acceptance comes in the knowledge of the offeror then it is complete (R1 International Pte Ltd v Lonstroff AG, 2014). When the acceptance is made by post, then, it is complete when the letter is posted. (Goh, Lee, Tham, 2014) Whenever an acceptance is made then the offeree must agree to the terms of the offer. If an acceptance is made which is not equivalent to the offer terms then there is no offer (Hyde v Wrench , [1840]). When the offeree does not accept the offer but changes the terms of the offer then it is counter offer (Tekdata Interconnections Ltd v Amphenol Ltd, 2009). A counter offer cancels the offer and the new offer is the counter offers which if approved by the offeror results in contract.(Nicholas, 2017) When no offer is made but offers are invited from public then it is invitation to offer (Fisher v Bell , [1961] ). An invitation can be made through advertisement. The people relying on advertisement can make offer and the adviser must accept the same to make a binding contract (Partridge v Crittenden , [1968]). (Nicholas, 2017) When an offer is accepted then there is agreement that is made amid the parties. But, when the promises are exchanged then the parties must have legal intention when the same are done. Any offer and acceptance when made without any legal intention then it has no relevance in law (T2 Networks Pte Ltd v Nasioncom Sdn Bhd, 2008). In domestic relationship, the legal intention is normally presumed to be lacking but is presume to be present in commercial relationships. But, this presumption is rebuttable. (Goh, Lee, Tham, 2014) Apart from offer, acceptance and intention, the parties must be exchanging the promises with some kind of benefit which supports the promises. It is called consideration in law and it makes the contract enforceable in law (Chwee Kin Keong and others v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd , 2004). Thus, these are the main elements of contract law which is applied to the facts of the case. Application of law As per the facts, Alan was a student. He intends to sell his books introduction to business law in Singapore. On 1st November 2015, he posted a note on facebook wherein he invited his friends to make offers to buy the book. So, as per (Fisher v Bell , [1961] )and (Partridge v Crittenden , [1968]), Allan has made an invitation to offer by advertising his book and his notes for sale. The selling price of the book/notes was $ 200 and he kept the offer open till 5th November. Also, as per (Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company , [1892]), the offer is for specific persons, so, the acceptance must also be made from such persons only. Since the offeree are defines, so, the acceptance must be made by the offeree only. Now, the issues are resolved. A valid contract was established amid Allan and Damien on 4th November evening, when an offer is made by Damien to buy the book at $ 200 and the same was accepted by Allan there and then. Bernards legal position and remedies On 2nd November, Bernard (who is the friend of the facebook of Allan) made an offer to Allan that he is interested in buying the book. However, he offered that he is interested in buying the book @ $150. Thus, an offer is made by Bernard which must be accepted by Allan to make a valid contract with Bernard. On 3rd Nov, Allan replied to the post of Bernard and he submitted that he is not keen to accept the offer at $ 150. Thus, the offer that is made by Bernard is rejected by Allan. Now, there is no offer which is present against which an acceptance can be made by the parties. On 4th November, Bernard posted $ 200 to Allan which is received by Allan on 5th November. However, Bernard has sent an acceptance, but, the same is not valid as there is no offer which is made by Allan to Bernard. No acceptance can be made when there is no offer at place. It will make no difference as when the letter is posted and when it is received. Since there is no offer so there can be no acceptance without the same. iii.Charleens legal position and remedies Charleen is also on the friend list of Allan. She made an offer to Allan and submitted that she is intended to buy the book @ $200. However, she submitted that she will pass the money by 6th November. When Allan nodded to the statement of Charleen, then, at that time, he was not accepting the offer of Charleen but was thinking of something else. So there was lack f intention when the acceptance was made. Also, the acceptance was not made against the offer. So, the acceptance made by Allan has no relevance in law. So, at this time there is no formation of contract amid the parties. Damiens legal position and remedies Damien was the friend of Bernard and is not on the facebook friend list of Allan. However he was interested in buying the book from Allan. An sms is send by Damien to Allan wherein he submitted that he is interested in buying the book and can sent the money by 4th November. This is an offer which is made by Damien to Allan. But, there is no acceptance that is made by Allan to Damien. In fact the invitation was not for Damien as he was not on the friends list of Allan. But, later in the evening of 4th November, Damien saw Allan and made a personal offer to Allan to buy the book at $ 200. Allan accepted this new offer of Damien and submitted that he will hand over the books by 7th November. So, a valid contract was established amid Damien and Allan on 4th November for the sale and purchase of the book at $ 200. Alternate dispute resolution technique and their respective pros and cons? Whenever two parties are in conflict with each other, then, they try to resolve their disputes. The resolution is normally attained through court process called litigation. Litigation is a most common technique to resolve the disputes wherein one party (plaintiff/aggrieved) imposes allegations on another party (defendant/defaulter) and the other party defends the allegations so imposed.(Kevin, 1999) Further, when litigation is commenced amid the parties then it takes considerable amount of time to resolve the disputes. Litigation is not only time consuming but also it is costly in nature. Further, both the parties must represent themselves through lawyer (not always necessary) in order to represent their case in the court of law thereby making the process of law more costly.(Charles, 1999) Thus, in order to curb the disadvantages that are associated with the process of litigation and to bring justice with no time delay and with cost effectiveness, a new method or technique was brought in to resolve the disputes. It is called Alternate Dispute resolution mechanism. Alternative dispute resolution mechanism is a technique wherein party does not move to the court of law to resolve their disputes, rather, the dispute is resolved with the help of a third natural party who after analyzing the arguments of both the parties come with an outcome which at times is binding upon the parities. An Alternative dispute resolution mechanism lays down two different methods of dispute resolution; the same are arbitration and conciliation. Arbitration When the two disputed parties intent to resolve their disputes with the help of an independent third party, who is neutral, then, it is a process of arbitration. The neutral person is called an arbitrator. The decision of the arbitrator is binding upon the parties and the parties cannot later submit that they are not interested in the outcome of the arbitration. The parties only represent the case and it is the arbitrator ho after full analysis to the facts and arguments come to the desired solution. (Tay, (1998) ) The main advantages that are associated with the process of arbitration are that it is the most effective alternative that is found when compared with litigation. It is not very time consuming when compared with the litigation process. Also, the expenses that are incurred are also less from litigation. The neutral person is someone who is the representative of the parties and thus both the parties believe in the decision of the arbitrator. There is presence of confidentiality and reliability. The decisions of the arbitrator are binding and thus there are less conflicts. But, there are few disadvantages that are also associated with the process of arbitration. Though the decision of the arbitrator is binding upon the parties however, if the parties are not in consent with the decision then they can go to the court of law. By going to litigation again increases the cost of dispute resolution. The common place of dispute resolution is at times not desirable to be reached by the parties. Another method which is normally availed by the parties, apart from arbitration, to resolve their disputes is mediation. (Grant Peter, 2015) Mediation When a third party is selected by the parties to the dispute in order to resolve the dispute, but, wherein the decision by the third party is not binding, then, it is the process of mediation. The third party who resolves the dispute is called mediator. The role of the mediator is merely counseling or guiding the parties and there is no set procedure that is followed by the mediator while coming to a decision. (Joel Hwee, 2009) There are few advantages that are associated with mediation are that, it is not very expensive nor the same is very time consuming. Since the decision is not binding upon the parties thus there is freedom that is availed to the parties to resolve to some other dispute resolution technique. Confidentiality is maintained in the process. However, there are few disadvantages that are also associated with the process. Since the decision is not binding thus it results in unending resolution of disputes. The intention of the parties is not to resolve the disputes. It is thus concluding that the process of arbitration and mediation are both very effective method of dispute resolution and thus any of them can be attained against litigation which is very time consuming and expensive. Conclusion It is thus concluded that a valid contract was established amid Damien and Allan on 4th November for the sale and purchase of the book at $ 200. Also, arbitration and mediations are the two alternative dispute resolution techniques which are normally used against litigation to resolve the disputes References Advice, S. L. (2012, August 14). Singapore Legal Advice. Retrieved May 15, 2017, from Requisite elements in the formation of a contract: https://singaporelegaladvice.com/law-articles/requisite-elements-in-the-formation-of-a-contract/ AG, R. I. ([2014] ). Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company ([1892]). Charles, P. (1999). Economic Consequences of Litigation Worldwide. Kluwer Law International. Chwee Kin Keong and others v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd (2004). Daniel John Brader and others v Commerzbank AG (2013). Fisher v Bell ([1961] ). Goh, V., Lee, W., Tham, C. (2014). Contract Law. SAL Ann Rev . Grant, J., Peter, P. (2015). ADR and Trusts: An international guide to arbitration and mediation of trust disputes. Spiramus Press Ltd. Hyde v Wrench ([1840]). Joel, L., Hwee, T. (2009). An Asian Perspective on Mediation. Academy Publishing. Kevin, T. (1999). The Singapore Legal System. Australia: NUS Press. Midlink Development Pte Ltd v The Stansfield Group Pte Ltd (2004). Nicholas, J. (2017). Nicholastong. Retrieved May 15, 2017, from Nicks Law Notes - Contarct law: https://www.nicholastong.com/law/Nick's%20Notes%20-%20Contract%20(Part%201).pdf Partridge v Crittenden ([1968]). R1 International Pte Ltd v Lonstroff AG (2014). RBC Properties Pte Ltd v Defu Furniture Pte Ltd ([2014] ). T2 Networks Pte Ltd v Nasioncom Sdn Bhd (2008). Tay, C. ((1998) ). Resolving Disputes by Arbitration: What You Need to Know . NUS Press. Tekdata Interconnections Ltd v Amphenol Ltd (2009). Woo Kah Wai v Chew Ai Hua Sandra ([2014]).