Tenders Law Legal

Question: Alex has decided to try and sell his car by parking it outside his house with a notice on the windscreen stating: For sale. Pristine example-one owner SGD60,000.00 or near offer. Please call number 38 or telephone 567552525, only.On Monday at 9am, Joshua sees the car, but as he is late for work he is unable to stop. He telephones Alex from work and makes an offer of SGD55,000.00 which Alex says he will consider.Michael calls Alexs house on Monday at 11.00am but Mary, Alexs daughter, is the only person there. He therefore leaves a note reading: Monday 11.05am. Please keep car for me-here is a cheque for SGD60,000.00 Michael. Mary leaves the note on Alexs desk in his study. On Monday afternoon, Alex decides to accept Joshuas offer and posts a letter at 2.30pm to Joshuas business address saying: I agree to sell on your terms. Because of the lower price cay you pay in cash?At 4.30pm on Monday, Alex reads Michaels acceptance and immediately telephones Joshuas business address, leaving a m essage on the recorded answering machine: Ignore the letter you will receive-deal off. Alex.Joshua is away on business and only listens to the tape on Wednesday evening. At 2.15pm on Monday, Lizzy sees the notice and hurriedly posts a letter of acceptance and cheque for SGD60,000 in time for the 3.00pm postal collection. Unfortunately, as Lizzy misaddress her letter, it only arrives on Friday. Questions: Advise each party as to their legal position.Which of the above cases are related to the Tenders Law Answer: Case discussion The initial advertisement regarding sale of the car should not be considered an offer but is rather invitation to treat i.e. it is an invitation to the interested buyers to make an offer that are preferably in the indicated price range of about SGD 60,000 (DrukkerSolicitors, 2015). These offers need to be intimated through the phone number mentioned in the advertisement and then based on these offers, Alex can grant an acceptance to one of these offers that would result in a contract being sealed between Alex and the offeree (Gibson Fraser, 2014). Joshua telephones Alex and makes an offer for the car and was willing to pay SGD 50,000 for the car. This offer was made on Monday morning (before 11 am) to which Alex did not provide acceptance or rejection and conveyed that he would consider the offer. On the same day at 11:05, Michael also extends a offer of SGD 60,000 by calling Alexs home and conveying the same to his daughter. Alexs daughter left a note for Alex regarding the same but he did not read it till evening 4:30 on the same day. Hence, on Monday Alex has received two offers one from Joshua and another from Michael. However, at 2:30 pm on Monday, Alex decided to communicate acceptance to Joshua offer through a letter. But an additional clause was added with regards to the payment being made in cash that makes the acceptance conditional and hence becomes a counter offer (Gibson Fraser, 2014). Further, on the same day at 4: 30 pm when Alex read Michaels offer, he communicated to Joshua regarding the counter offer as not valid which was read by Johsua only on Wednesday. Besides, Lizzy at 2: 15 pm sends the letter of acceptance with SGD 60,000 cheque which was received by Alex only on Friday. Legal positions Joshua Alex made a counter offer since acceptance was conditional to the payment being in cash and withdrew the offer at 4:30 pm on Monday before Joshua could express his acceptance or rejection (Gibson Fraser, 2014). Hence, there is no contract with Joshua with regards to the car. Lizzy Lizzy made an offer of SGD 60,000 at 2:15 pm on Monday but the same was communicated to Alex only on Friday and since he was not aware of the offer since there was no other communication, hence without Alexs acceptance there would not be any legal contrReferencesact between Lizzy and Alex. Michael Michael has made an offer of SDG 60,000 to Alex, that was received by him at 4:30 pm on Monday and it is likely that Alex would provide acceptance to Michael since that seems to be the main reason for withdrawing the offer made to Joshua. Hence, a legal and enforceable contract is sealed between Michael and Alex assuming the Alexs acceptance is unconditional (Gibson Fraser, 2014). Tenders Law The case of Lizzy is driven by Tenders Law since she makes an offer to the Alex with regards to the car. Further, the initial offer made by both Joshua and Michael also fall within the ambit of tenders law (DrukkerSolicitors, 2015). References DrukkerSolicitors 2015, Invitation to treat, Drukker Solicitors, Available online from https://www.drukker.co.uk/publications/reference/invitation-to-treat/#.VpTbWLZ97IU (Accessed on January 12, 2015) Gibson, A Fraser, D 2014. Business Law, 8th edn, Pearson Publications, Sydney