, PVL3702 ASSIGNMENT 1 SEMESTER 2 2026
DUE DATE: SEPTEMBER 2026
1. Jack’s Original Offer to Peter
Jack’s statement at the party constituted a valid offer to Peter to sell the original Table
Mountain painting for R600 000. For a contract of sale to arise, the parties must reach
consensus through offer and acceptance, with agreement on the thing sold and the
purchase price.1
In Van Aardt v Galway, the court confirmed that acceptance must be clear and
unambiguous and must relate to the offer made; an acceptance of something different from
the offer does not establish consensus.2
Peter did not accept Jack’s offer at the party. The following day, he merely informed
Themba of Jack’s offer. This communication was not an acceptance because it was neither
communicated to Jack nor expressed as Peter’s unconditional acceptance of Jack’s offer.
Acceptance must be made by the offeree and communicated to the offeror.3 Consequently,
no contract was concluded between Jack and Peter at this stage.
2. Peter and Themba’s Proposal as a Counter-Offer
When Peter and Themba later informed Jack that they wished to purchase the painting
together and would each pay R300 000, their communication constituted a counter-offer,
rather than an acceptance of Jack’s original offer.
1
Mnguni v Prima Inspectacar Wonderboom (Pty) Ltd (A609/2012) [2015] ZAGPPHC 180 para 18.
2
Van Aardt v Galway (1539/2005) [2010] ZAECGHC 62 para 10.
3
Mnguni v Prima Inspectacar Wonderboom (Pty) Ltd (A609/2012) [2015] ZAGPPHC 180 paras 19–21.
DUE DATE: SEPTEMBER 2026
1. Jack’s Original Offer to Peter
Jack’s statement at the party constituted a valid offer to Peter to sell the original Table
Mountain painting for R600 000. For a contract of sale to arise, the parties must reach
consensus through offer and acceptance, with agreement on the thing sold and the
purchase price.1
In Van Aardt v Galway, the court confirmed that acceptance must be clear and
unambiguous and must relate to the offer made; an acceptance of something different from
the offer does not establish consensus.2
Peter did not accept Jack’s offer at the party. The following day, he merely informed
Themba of Jack’s offer. This communication was not an acceptance because it was neither
communicated to Jack nor expressed as Peter’s unconditional acceptance of Jack’s offer.
Acceptance must be made by the offeree and communicated to the offeror.3 Consequently,
no contract was concluded between Jack and Peter at this stage.
2. Peter and Themba’s Proposal as a Counter-Offer
When Peter and Themba later informed Jack that they wished to purchase the painting
together and would each pay R300 000, their communication constituted a counter-offer,
rather than an acceptance of Jack’s original offer.
1
Mnguni v Prima Inspectacar Wonderboom (Pty) Ltd (A609/2012) [2015] ZAGPPHC 180 para 18.
2
Van Aardt v Galway (1539/2005) [2010] ZAECGHC 62 para 10.
3
Mnguni v Prima Inspectacar Wonderboom (Pty) Ltd (A609/2012) [2015] ZAGPPHC 180 paras 19–21.
