100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached 4.2 TrustPilot
logo-home
Exam (elaborations)

PVL3702 Assignment 1 Semester 2 Memo | Due 26 August 2025

Rating
5.0
(1)
Sold
8
Pages
6
Grade
A+
Uploaded on
27-07-2025
Written in
2024/2025

PVL3702 Assignment 1 Semester 2 Memo | Due 26 August 2025. TWO ANSWERS PROVIDED. ASSIGNMENT 01 QUESTION: Shane wants to purchase a limited-edition Porsche motor vehicle which was recently released in Germany. He visits the local Porsche dealership in Johannesburg. The owner of the dealership informs Shane that there is a twelve month waiting period to receive the limited-edition Porsche model, from the date the order is placed, because this model is manufactured and assembled in Germany, and thereafter it will be sent to the Johannesburg dealership in South Africa. Shane signed the ‘Contract of Sale’ document presented by the dealership with its standard terms and conditions, which stipulated a purchase price of R2 Million Rand for this limited-edition Porsche car. In accordance with this offer, Shane was required to pay the full purchase price to the seller (which is ‘Porsche Johannesburg’) within 30 days of him signing the agreement, and after the manager of the dealership requested him to do so, Shane timeously complied with this requirement. Eight months after signing the ‘Contract of Sale’ document, the manager of the dealership informed Shane that with reference to one of the terms in the document, Shane needs to specify if he wants any extras to be included in the car, and he needs to pay for it. Shane specified to the seller that he wanted a sunroof installed which cost him an extra R50 000 and he paid the seller for it, at the time. Shane was then informed by the manager that he should expect to receive the Porsche limited-edition car in Johannesburg, in a few months-time. A few months later the Porsche car arrived in Johannesburg at the dealership. Porsche only manufactured five cars of this limited-edition model globally, so there was great excitement at the dealership when the car arrived in South Africa. Porsche enthusiasts were flying from all over the country to see the car. People were offering more than double the amount Shane paid for the car. This got the owner of the dealership to think whether he could sell the car for a much higher price, as the car had not yet been delivered and registered in Shane’s name. The owner of ‘Porsche Johannesburg’ sought legal advice from his attorney. The attorney scrutinised the ‘Contract of Sale’ document and found that whilst Shane signed it, the seller’s authorised representative did not, even though the document catered for the seller or its representative to sign the document. It seems that with all the excitement when Shane signed the document to purchase this specific Porsche model at the time, subsequently no one realised that the seller’s authorised representative did not sign the document. The seller’s authorised representative admitted that it was an oversight on his part that he did not sign the ‘Contract of Sale’ document, to indicate the seller’s acceptance of Shane’s offer. Shane assumed that the document was signed by all the relevant parties. Shane thereafter received a letter from the seller’s attorney indicating that a valid contract of sale was not concluded between the parties for the sale of the Porsche limited-edition car as the seller’s authorised representative did not sign the ‘Contract of Sale’ document, which according to the attorney meant that the mode of acceptance was not complied with. The letter went further to state that the seller will not be selling the Porsche car to Shane, but the seller will be refunding him the purchase price he paid plus the amount he paid for the sunroof. Shane is furious and he approaches you for legal advice. Formulate a legal opinion for Shane wherein you specifically advise him only about the issues relating to the prescribed mode of acceptance, and if the mode of acceptance was not complied with, whether a valid contract of sale was concluded between the parties. Assume that when Shane signed the ‘Çontract of Sale’ document, it constituted a valid offer, and further assume that the only contentious and relevant issue pertaining to the acceptance, relates to the mode of acceptance. Do not discuss the issue of waiver and do not discuss breach of contract. Also, do not apply the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008. Note the following: - This assignment question carries 10 marks so only focus specifically on the legal issues the question requires you to address. - Your answer must not exceed one typed page or two written pages. This does not include the Bibliography, which should be done on a separate page.

Show more Read less
Institution
Module









Whoops! We can’t load your doc right now. Try again or contact support.

Connected book

Written for

Institution
Module

Document information

Uploaded on
July 27, 2025
Number of pages
6
Written in
2024/2025
Type
Exam (elaborations)
Contains
Questions & answers

Subjects

Content preview

, PLEASE USE THIS DOCUMENT AS A GUIDE TO ANSWER YOUR ASSIGNMENT

A) Formulate a legal opinion for Shane wherein you specifically advise him only about the issues
relating to the prescribed mode of acceptance, and if the mode of acceptance was not complied
with, whether a valid contract of sale was concluded between the parties. Assume that when
Shane signed the ‘Çontract of Sale’ document, it constituted a valid offer, and further assume
that the only contentious and relevant issue pertaining to the acceptance, relates to the mode of
acceptance. Do not discuss the issue of waiver and do not discuss breach of contract. Also, do not
apply the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008.

Legal Opinion on the Validity of the Contract of Sale for Shane's Porsche

To: Shane
From: Legal Advisor
Date: [Current Date]
Subject: Analysis of Contract Validity – Prescribed Mode of Acceptance

Dear Shane,

You have sought legal advice regarding the validity of your contract of sale for the limited-edition
Porsche, specifically concerning the seller's representative's failure to sign the 'Contract of Sale'
document and the attorney's assertion that the prescribed mode of acceptance was not complied with.
This opinion will focus exclusively on the issue of the prescribed mode of acceptance and its impact
on contract formation, assuming your signing of the document constituted a valid offer and that this
is the only contentious issue regarding acceptance.

1. General Principles of Contract Formation and Acceptance
A contract is generally formed when parties reach agreement on all material terms, typically
analyzed through the rules of offer and acceptance. In your case, it is assumed that when you signed
the 'Contract of Sale' document, this constituted your valid offer to purchase the limited-edition
Porsche. This means the dealership (Porsche Johannesburg) was the offeree, and their acceptance
was required to form the contract.

For an acceptance to be valid, it must meet certain requirements, including being in the form
prescribed by the offeror (if any). As the offeror, you are entitled to prescribe the method of
acceptance, and generally, no other form will suffice if a specific method is stipulated. The 'Contract
of Sale' document "catered for the seller or its representative to sign", which suggests that the seller's
signature was the intended or prescribed mode of acceptance. The seller's attorney argues that
because their representative did not sign the document, the "mode of acceptance was not complied
with," leading to the conclusion that no valid contract was concluded1.

2. The Reliance Theory as a Corrective to Non-Compliance with Prescribed Mode of
Acceptance
While strict adherence to a prescribed mode of acceptance is generally required, South African law
recognizes instances where a contract may still be upheld despite a lack of actual subjective
agreement (consensus), by applying the reliance theory. This theory, also known as quasi-mutual
assent, provides that contractual liability may arise when one party leads the other into a reasonable
belief that consensus has been reached, or that a prescribed form of acceptance has been complied
with.

1. Hutchison et al., 2022:p87

Reviews from verified buyers

Showing all reviews
3 months ago

5.0

1 reviews

5
1
4
0
3
0
2
0
1
0
Trustworthy reviews on Stuvia

All reviews are made by real Stuvia users after verified purchases.

Get to know the seller

Seller avatar
Reputation scores are based on the amount of documents a seller has sold for a fee and the reviews they have received for those documents. There are three levels: Bronze, Silver and Gold. The better the reputation, the more your can rely on the quality of the sellers work.
Aimark94 University of South Africa (Unisa)
Follow You need to be logged in order to follow users or courses
Sold
6575
Member since
6 year
Number of followers
3168
Documents
1326
Last sold
3 weeks ago
Simple & Affordable Study Materials

Study Packs & Assignments

4.2

520 reviews

5
277
4
124
3
74
2
14
1
31

Recently viewed by you

Why students choose Stuvia

Created by fellow students, verified by reviews

Quality you can trust: written by students who passed their exams and reviewed by others who've used these revision notes.

Didn't get what you expected? Choose another document

No problem! You can straightaway pick a different document that better suits what you're after.

Pay as you like, start learning straight away

No subscription, no commitments. Pay the way you're used to via credit card and download your PDF document instantly.

Student with book image

“Bought, downloaded, and smashed it. It really can be that simple.”

Alisha Student

Frequently asked questions