Contract Law – Problem Question Answer
In order to advise Brenda accordingly, one would have to analyse and examine the
facts and the area of the law to her case in order to determine whether or not Brenda
has a strong case, and to predict what the outcome is likely to be if she were to take
her case to court.
In this scenario, it appears that Brenda wishes to establish that although she had
expressed to Andrew in their communications that she would keep her offer open to
him for a specified period, she is however, entitled to withdraw that offer before an
acceptance could occur; and that her communication of a revocation of the offer had
reached him first before he was able to accept the offer. This suggests that despite
the fact that Andrew had posted his letter of acceptance, it was ineffective to form a
binding contract because the revocation prevents this from happening. In addition,
Brenda would also need to establish that she had had the option to reject David’s
offer. But in order to do so, one would have to look at what actions has been taken
and what has been said between the parties so that relevant authorities can be
applied to the case in order to provide a solution to Brenda’s problem.
First of all, Brenda does not have to accept David's offer. This is because Brenda's
advertisement on the internet only amounts to an invitation to treat. Therefore, this
gives Brenda the choice to reject or accept David's offer. Since David is furious and
wants to know why Brenda did not accept his offer, it is advisable, though not
obligatory, for Brenda to e-mail him to express her apologies for his disappointment
for not having his offer accepted by her.
It appears that the advertisement for the sale of the car which has been placed on
Brenda’s website is considered to be an invitation to treat because it has been
suggested that “websites are the electronic equivalent of displays, advertisements,
or catalogues of products for sale”1. This seems to imply that “in general, a website
constitutes an invitation to treat”2. Regulation 12 of the Electronic Commerce (EC
Directive) Regulations 2002 states that when an on-line buyer wants to purchase an
item on a website, their “order shall be the contractual offer” 3, which is further proof
1
Poole, J. Textbook on Contract Law 8th edition (Oxford: OUP, 2006) p.58
2
Ibid.
3
the Electronic Commerce (EC Directive) Regulations 2002 SI 2002/2013
In order to advise Brenda accordingly, one would have to analyse and examine the
facts and the area of the law to her case in order to determine whether or not Brenda
has a strong case, and to predict what the outcome is likely to be if she were to take
her case to court.
In this scenario, it appears that Brenda wishes to establish that although she had
expressed to Andrew in their communications that she would keep her offer open to
him for a specified period, she is however, entitled to withdraw that offer before an
acceptance could occur; and that her communication of a revocation of the offer had
reached him first before he was able to accept the offer. This suggests that despite
the fact that Andrew had posted his letter of acceptance, it was ineffective to form a
binding contract because the revocation prevents this from happening. In addition,
Brenda would also need to establish that she had had the option to reject David’s
offer. But in order to do so, one would have to look at what actions has been taken
and what has been said between the parties so that relevant authorities can be
applied to the case in order to provide a solution to Brenda’s problem.
First of all, Brenda does not have to accept David's offer. This is because Brenda's
advertisement on the internet only amounts to an invitation to treat. Therefore, this
gives Brenda the choice to reject or accept David's offer. Since David is furious and
wants to know why Brenda did not accept his offer, it is advisable, though not
obligatory, for Brenda to e-mail him to express her apologies for his disappointment
for not having his offer accepted by her.
It appears that the advertisement for the sale of the car which has been placed on
Brenda’s website is considered to be an invitation to treat because it has been
suggested that “websites are the electronic equivalent of displays, advertisements,
or catalogues of products for sale”1. This seems to imply that “in general, a website
constitutes an invitation to treat”2. Regulation 12 of the Electronic Commerce (EC
Directive) Regulations 2002 states that when an on-line buyer wants to purchase an
item on a website, their “order shall be the contractual offer” 3, which is further proof
1
Poole, J. Textbook on Contract Law 8th edition (Oxford: OUP, 2006) p.58
2
Ibid.
3
the Electronic Commerce (EC Directive) Regulations 2002 SI 2002/2013
