PVL3702
Assignment 1 Semester 2 – 2023
Unique Number: 698664
QUESTION
Carol, an owner of an exclusive bicycle shop advertised a special limited-edition
bicycle for sale, and invited the public to make offers for the bicycle. Jane and
Portia were among many people who submitted written offers for the bicycle.
Jane’s offer was for R150 000, and Portia’s offer was for R190 000. Although
Carol intended to accept Portia’s offer, she erroneously wrote a letter to Jane,
wherein she accepted Jane’s offer. Jane believes that an enforceable contract
was concluded but Carol denies this. Apply the iustus error doctrine and advise
if a legally binding contract was concluded between Carol and Jane. Discuss
fully and refer to case law in your answer. Do not apply the Consumer Protection
Act 68 of 2008.
[20]
Identifying the issues
Carol accidentally sent the letter of acceptance to Jane because it intended to contract
with another party. Thus, the question is whether there is error on the part of the
company. In terms of the iustus error doctrine, Y is both material and reasonable.
Discussing the law
The error made by Carol is due to an error in persona. When a party intends to accept
the offer of one party but instead accepts the offer of another, the error is usually
Assignment 1 Semester 2 – 2023
Unique Number: 698664
QUESTION
Carol, an owner of an exclusive bicycle shop advertised a special limited-edition
bicycle for sale, and invited the public to make offers for the bicycle. Jane and
Portia were among many people who submitted written offers for the bicycle.
Jane’s offer was for R150 000, and Portia’s offer was for R190 000. Although
Carol intended to accept Portia’s offer, she erroneously wrote a letter to Jane,
wherein she accepted Jane’s offer. Jane believes that an enforceable contract
was concluded but Carol denies this. Apply the iustus error doctrine and advise
if a legally binding contract was concluded between Carol and Jane. Discuss
fully and refer to case law in your answer. Do not apply the Consumer Protection
Act 68 of 2008.
[20]
Identifying the issues
Carol accidentally sent the letter of acceptance to Jane because it intended to contract
with another party. Thus, the question is whether there is error on the part of the
company. In terms of the iustus error doctrine, Y is both material and reasonable.
Discussing the law
The error made by Carol is due to an error in persona. When a party intends to accept
the offer of one party but instead accepts the offer of another, the error is usually
