Such lack of communication of acceptance negates enforceability of alleged contract as was held in the case of Felthouse v Bindley after a potential seller failed to communicate acceptance of an offer for a purchase (Collins, 2003).Tina offered to supply a specified quantity and quality of raspberry pulp to Cammy Pty Ltd at Cammy’s store on a further condition that payment would be made after seven days. Cammy however accepted the offer on conditions that delivery would be made free and in three sets, 10 days apart. Tina then refused to make delivery to Cammy who sued for damages for breach of contract.The issue for determination in the problem is termination of a contract by counter offer. This is because existence of a valid contract emanates from agreement between parties in which terms presented by one party have to be accepted by another party.Presenting different terms to an offer in acceptance is called a counter offer and terminates the original offer (Floyd and Allen, 2002). The effect of making a counter offer is similar to that of directly rejecting an offer and no claim can consequently be made over the offer even if it is still running (Emanuel, 2008). The doctrine of counter offer corresponds to the “mirror image” principle of acceptance that provides for correspondence of acceptance to terms of offer (Mulcahy, 2004, p. Presentation of new terms by an offeree therefore contravenes the “mirror image” doctrine to invalidate an acceptance (Mulcahy, 2004, p. 73) and an offeree, upon making a counter offer, relinquishes rights to accepting the offer (Haupt, 2006).In the case, TT Company made an offer to Cammy who made a counter offer. The terms included quantity and time of delivery. This terminated the original offer as was held in the case of Hyde v Wrech (1840) (Rush and Ottley, 2006).Lee pledges to buy land from Harry under a condition that the seller reserves the right to revoke the contract if the purchase is not made within the stipulated date. Lee failed to make the purchase on the due date, informed Harry’s solicitor that he would be able to complete the purchase a week after the due date and the solicitor agreed to consult with Harry. Harry however terminated the contract three days after the due date and Lee argues that Harry has no right to terminate the contract.Common law differentiates sale contracts from agreement to sell. A contract for sale for example transfers rights in the property to the buyer while
Bradgate, R and White, F 2007, Commercial law, Oxford University Press, New York.
Collins, H 2003, The contract law, Cambridge University Press, Mason.
Delaney, P and Whittington, O 2009, Wiley CPA exam review 2010 regulation, John Wiley & Sons, New Jersey.
Delta, G and Matsuura, J 2008, Law of the internet, volume 2, Aspen Publishers Online, New York.
Emanuel, S 2008, Contracts, Aspen Publishers Online, New York.
Floyd, C and Allen, M 2002, Real estate principles, Dearborn Real Estate, Chicago.
Haupt, K 2006, Washington real estate fundamentals, Rockwell Publishing, Bellevue.
Helewitz 2010, Basic contract law for paralegals, sixth edition, Aspen Publishers Online, New York.
Hussain, A 1978, General principles and commercial law of Kenya, East African Publishers, Nairobi.
Kelleher, T Smith, J and Hancock, C 2009, Smith, Currie & Hancock’s common sense construction law: A practical guide for the construction profession, John Wiley & Sons, New Jersey.
Meiners, R Ringleb, A and Edwards, F 2008, The legal environment of business, Cengage Learning, Mason.
Mulcahy, L 2004, CContract law in perspective 4/e, Routledge, London.
Rush, J and Ottley, M 2006, Business law, Cengage Learning EMEA, New York.
Turley 2001, Australian principles of commercial law, Routledge, London.
Wishart, M 2007, Contract law, Oxford University Press, New York.
Please type your essay title, choose your document type, enter your email and we send you essay samples