Ethnically Homogeneous Middleman Group

The primary obligation of a suitable contract is a conformity that normally consists of an “proposal” and “acceptance.” It involves gathering of like minds together, meaning agreement between parties of similar minds. There are a number of composite rules that exist to determine the involvement of “proposal” and “acceptance.”  In the famous case of, Carill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co, it was held by the Court that an proposal is different from an invitation to deal. To distinguish between the two, one needs to understand the intention of the party making the statement. The test of determination is indeed a difficult one. Determination has to be made based on the declaration, whether the declaration was an affirmative sentence or simply result of further negotiation (Ayres  & Schwartz, 2014).

The contract law is the essential division of commandment in this case. It does not consist of exact rules and regulations relatively it lays the position of values that, restricts the privileges and obligations of the parties to the agreement. Thus, the parties to the agreement should not break the lawful obligations. The business law states that, every declaration and every form of declarations forms a contemplation for the additional party. A “proposal”, when approved by the supplementary party is called a guarantee. The given  definition of formation of agreement suits important to analyze the given scenario. Therefore, for an agreement to become a contract two essentials are important to fulfill, proposal and acceptance of the proposal made (Chen, 2012). 

In the aforementioned case, there is “proposal” and “multiple acceptances” of the proposal made. Alan makes the proposal. Alan decides to promote a book called “Introduction to Business Law in Singapore,” which was part of the obligatory paper in Commercial Law.  Alan posted on a social networking site about his proposal. He made the proposal on November 1. The advertising cost of the book was $200.00. Alan specified the cut-off date for sum on November 5, 2014. Bernard established the present made by Alan. He responded to the post of Alan accommodating his proposal. Alan, though, gave no additional permission to the reply of Bernard. Bernard sent the money to Alan via courier on November 7, 2014. Alan gave his unique book and remarked that his comments are printed in the paperback.

Alana has younger sister named Charleen. She also saw the post made by Alan and was interested to purchase the book at $200. Alan did not get Charleen’s receipt gravely. Alan thought that she is too immature to use that book. Alan, however, agreed to Charleen’s acceptance while he was thinking about something else. A agreement was formed between the brother and the sister.On November 6, 2014, after getting her pouch money, Charleen gave $200.00 to Alan. She left the money on the table for her brother.

Damien also showed his interest towards for the book and was ready to accept the “proposal” made by Alan. On November 4, 2014, Damien met Alan in his college. Damien gave him $200.00 in money. Alan kept the cash and said that he will provide all the matter in November 7, 2014. On the same day, he purchased a analogous book from a supermarket and gave the book to Damien.

The agreement that was formed between Alan and Bernard was no contract. Alan accepted the cash that was send by Bernard and accordingly handled the book to him on November 7, 2014.  This act or  was wrong on the side of Alan. Shortly it was established that the book was obtainable free of cost at Kaplan Higher Education. Consequently, Alan is legally accountable for the fake proposal made by him. Bernard can file a suit for compensation and damages for the proposal made by Alan.

When Alan posted about his proposal, Bernard responded to the proposal made on November. Alan posted the cost of the book as $ 200.Bernard made a contradict proposal to the proposal made by Alan. The contradict prproposal made by Bernard was $150.

A counter proposal is an prproposal that is made against the first proposal. This type of proposal may be accepted or rejected. A “counter proposal” is the amendment of the primary “proposal” making the proposal more feasable  and reasonable. To accept or reject the “counterproposal” is always left at the freedom of the proposalee. When an individual makes a “counterproposal” then the person is free to either recognize the proposal or decline it (Williams, 2014).

In the given situation also, Bernard made a “counter proposal” to Alan. Alan neither accepted the counter proposal made by him, nor expressly rejected it. On November 3, 2014, Bernard made compensation for Alan and posted the amount to Alan. Consequently, Alan acknowledged the sum and send the book to Bernard. In this case, if we apply the postal rule then the contract is said to be formed. However, Alan never gave confirmation to Bernard in response to the counterproposal made by him. Alan accepted the sum and delivered the book.

In this case Bernard’s legal position is nowhere. The reason behind this is that no agreement survived between Alan and him. Alan never acknowledged the oppose proposal” made by Bernard. Therefore, we can terminate that no valid agreement existed between Alan and Bernard.

Alan’s younger sister is Charleen. She is a student of O level. When she saw the proposal made by Alan she was also interested in trading the book on Commercial Law from her brother. Charleen agreed to make the sum to his brother. When Charleen approached his brother, Alan simply nodded his head in response to what Charleen said. When Alan nodded his head he was thinking about something else, he was imagining about football. Therefore, Alan was not in a appropriate intelligence of mind when he decided to Charleen’s acceptance to his proposal.

In the given case, the query that arises here is whether there existed a suitable agreement between Alan and Charleen. Presumingly, if Charleen was a student of O level, then her age is not more than 16 or 17 years. She is still a child. By law of agreement, an agreement with minor is no agreement. Similarly since Charleen and Alan were kin of one another in this matter, the Court should seriously think about such an agreement as simply social and household understanding. Law does not tie a communal and residential understanding. One can’t file a suit for violation of agreement against another. In this way, in this domain too, no agreement survived amid Alan and Charleen. In the same contextual investigation, it was likewise watched that while Alan gestured his head and acknowledged the proposal of Alan he was not in a decent perspective. He gestured equivocally without further transactions with Charleen. In this way, it might be assumed here that the agreement between Charleen and Alan was simply local in character and genuine, no real agreement survived between them.

Damien was Bernard’s companion. Damien found Alan’s telephone integer. Damien made a “counter proposal” to Alan by means of SMS. Damien gave the cash to Alan on November 4, 2014, and on November 7, 2014, Alan gave the book alongwith the notes to Damien. It is the agreement between Alan and Damien that is legitimate and has satisfied every component of a substantial agreement. The accompanying rudiments are crucial for an agreement to get satisfied. They are the following: “proposal”, “acceptance”, “consideration”, “intention”  and “legitimate connection.” As against Bernard and Charleen, just Damien has satisfied every component of a suitable agreement. Therefore, a substantial contract is framed between Alan and Damien. Since Bernard made a “counter proposal” to Alan that was not acknowledged by Alan and by the rule of postal guideline, the agreement gets to be invalid.

Thus, on November 23, 2014, Bernard and Damien found that the book on Commercial Law was issued free of charge by Kaplan Higher Education. Alan additionally made changes on his introductory proposal. Alan expressed that he protected a elevated refinement score, however he found out how to get score “credit” for his test. Moreover, he said that he would furnish extra notes besides the book. Nonetheless, he furnished no additional comments with the course book to Bernard. Convincingly, Damien can seek legal activity towards Alan distorting the estimation of the book. Subsequently there was no legitimate agreement between Bernard and Alan, Bernard can assert for reimbursement from Alan. Damien, despite what might be expected, can file a suit for harms or remuneration from Alan. By law of agreement in case that if any of parties break the agreement, then the abused party might record a suit for reimbursement or indemnity. The expense of the harm or remuneration is evaluated by misfortune endured by him.

The different option for resolution of dispute is, “arbitration, mediation, and litigation.” Mediation is the procedure whereby an impartial outsider helps the parties in dispute achieves a willful choice. Conciliation is a casual, well disposed and private method for settling a argument. It helps in determining any contention whether individual or business. An arbiter presides over the dispute resolution. The mediator who presides over the meeting helps both parties to solve their dispute in such a way that it is satisfactory by both the parties in dispute (Puil & Weele, 2014).

However, adjudication is a more official method of dispute resolution. The system of evimainsence and test are often supple and tranquil. The arbitrator is a person that controls over the argument between the parties. He uses more flexible rules for evidence and trial. The decision that is made by the authority is compulsory on both the parties. In the process of arbitration where the decision is not binding on the parties, the parties may file a plea before the trial court for the resolution of their argument. Arbitration is best suited for situations where the person wants to decide the result of the dispute which otherwise is luxurious and extensive (Deakin & Morris, 2012).

One of the best methods of solving dispute is litigation. Litigation is the process that takes place in the Court of rule. In a official process of proceedings the applicant files a suit against the defendant. The applicant and the defendant have the right to hire lawful advisors, who present their matter before the Court of Law in sustain of their proceedings. The judgment is concluding and compulsory upon both the parties. If the opposite party is dissatisfied with the decision of the Court, he can file a suit of appeal against the decision in the higher Court. The process of litigation is time consuming and costly. However, the decision mostly ends in a fair and just way. . It is optional that in all disputes the parties should first resort to alternating argument declaration before filing a suit for proceedings (Knapp, 2013).

Reference List:

Ayres, I., & Schwartz, A. (2014). No-Reading Problem in Consumer Contract Law, The. Stan. L. Rev., 66, 545.

Chen-Wishart, M. (2012). Contract law. Oxford University Press.

Deakin, S. F., & Morris, G. S. (2012). Labour law. Hart publishing.

Gallagher, M. E., Giles, J., Park, A., & Wang, M. (2013). China’s 2008 labor contract law: implementation and implications for China’s workers. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, (6542).

Hillman, R. A. (2012). The richness of contract law: An analysis and critique of contemporary theories of contract law (Vol. 28). Springer Science & Business Media.

Knapp, C. L. (2013). Unconscionability in American Contract Law: A Twenty-First Century Survey. UC Hastings Research Paper, (71).

Landa, J. T. (2014). A theory of the ethnically homogeneous middleman group: an institutional alternative to contract law (with an Afterword).Handbook of East Asian Entrepreneurship, 82.

McKendrick, E. (2014). Contract law: text, cases, and materials. Oxford University Press (UK).

Poole, J. (2014). Textbook on contract law. Oxford University Press, USA.

Puil, J. V. D., & Weele, A. V. (2014). Contract Law and Tort Law. InInternational Contracting: Contract Management in Complex Construction Projects (pp. 285-292).

Twigg-Flesner, C. (2013). The Europeanisation of contract law: current controversies in law. Routledge.

Williams, S. H. (2014). Survey Of South Carolina Law: Contract Law: Consumers And Remedies: Do Limitation Of Liability Clauses Domore Harm Than Good?. SCL Rev., 65, 663-963.

BoomGrades.com
is a name in assignment
writing services that students trust. We offer our assignment writing
services for a wide variety of assignment
including essays, dissertations, case
studies and more. Students can place their order with us anytime as we function
24×7, and get their copies at unbeatable prices. We guarantee that all of our
solutions are plagiarism-free.