Laws1150 Assignment – Contracts
There are 4 main issues in this scenario.
CHRIS’ ENTITLEMENT TO THE EH HOLDEN
i) Did Alina’s email constitute an offer?
An offer requires a willingness to be bound by a contract regulated by certain terms. Under the Electronic Transactions Act 2000 (NSW) , s14B (1) specifies that a message conveyed through electronic communication that does not have a specific addressee and or convey an explicit intention to form a binding agreement upon acceptance is an invitation to treat . Alina’s email is specifically addressed to Ben and may still constitute an offer. To determine this, the intention surrounding the offer must first be construed objectively, considering how a reasonable person would perceive it . An email
…show more content…
The general rule is that silence cannot amount to acceptance , and Ben’s failure to reply to the email is consistent with silence. However, an exception to this rule was discussed in Empirnall, where it was held that where the offeree acts exactly in accordance with the conditions of the offer, then this can constitute an acceptance by conduct. This requirement is extinguished in the case of unilateral contracts, which require the offeree to perform his/her obligations under the bargain as acceptance of the offer. A binding agreement is formed upon completion of the performance. The offer made by Alina would give rise to a unilateral contract, if Ben execution of required conditions of the offer would leave Alina’s promise executory at the time of the formation of the binding agreement. Consideration in such cases also arises when a quid pro quo exists, which means the promise made by the offeror would be valid only in return for completion of the conditions. Thus, Ben’s act of refraining from bidding at the auction may be construed as an acceptance by conduct, despite not replying to Alina’s email, and valuable consideration as Alina’s promise to sell Chris the car was made in return for Ben’s withdrawal from the