The issue:
The issue here is the sale of Robert shop for two customers is Joshue and James. problem occurred when Robert agreed to sell for James to RM9.5 price, but earlier Joshue store intending to buy at a lower price RM10 Robert disagree. When Robert heard from people outside the shop sold for RM9.5 Joshue want to sue Robert. Under this scenario, there are two issues to be discussed:
The first is: "a contract between Robert and Joshue not?"
Second: "Robert events Joshue can purchase store on it?" Law and application : May 5, 2007 when Robert called for Joshue talking shop selling price RM10, here is a suggestion. ACT 1950 Under the contract provisions because this is a contract in which s2 (a) has written: "when one person to another signifies HIS Willingness to abstain from doing so or to anything, with a view to obtaining the assent of other có to the act or abstinence, he is said to make a proposal. " After giving their suggestions, Robert received feedback Joshue:" the price is a bit expensive. Is It Possible to Reduce the price a bit Because I do not have enough money to pay the deposit as I just Bought a new car? ". This is not the buyer of joshue accept an offer that is his new. As in Rule s2 (b): "Whom khi person to the proposal is made signifies his assent thereto, the proposal is said to be accepted: a proposal, khi accepted, Becomes a promise." In addition, acceptance is a must under s7 (a) "in oder to convert a proposal Into a promise the absolute and unqualified acceptance phải." Accordingly, Joshue the contrary, unqualified and qualified. Joshue Pha's response to the offer of Robert day 5.5 is a new proposal, it is called Counter-offer. This is mentioned in the law S6 (c): "a proposal is Revoked by the failure of the acceptor to a condition precedent to acceptance fulfil.". and here Joshue who made the offer, and Robert is the receiver. After receiving feedback on the store Joshue slightly higher prices and not enough money, Joshue Robert replied that: "I believe the price is not negotiable Offered as I lower it the market value of coal. The market value is RM11 million. "According to Robert, the RM10 price is lower than the market price at the time and did not agree with the proposal that Joshue given. Then Joshue no feedback about the unacceptable Robert discounts. Both contacts and agreements not add anything. No acceptance or sales agreement here, that means that between Robert and Joshue no legal contract purchase at all. On 7.5 Robert sent an offer to James on the sale of its stores "Robert sent a SMS (short message service) to the same shop, photographing James offering price of RM9.5 million at.". Here are suggestions to James from Robert. Because the store is James so concerned after receiving the message from Robert James texted respondents agreed. Messages considered as acceptance of the offer by james on Robert. This acceptance can be considered as a contract. According to s2 (a), s2 (b) is between Robert and James from here has a legal contract. James had the right to buy the cave of Robert. Then you go to breakfast 7.8 days Joshue heard Robert sale store for James. The next day, Joshua was called to Robert and refers to the purchase of the store, but Robert refused for sale: "Joshua Robert to Discuss gọi and purchase agreement on the sale. Robert Had Told him he sold it to có as he thought James was not interested anymore Joshua. "The problem here is suing Robert and wanted Joshue counseling robert event or not. As analyzed above, when Robert made offer, then counter-offer Joshua resubmit not agree, so between them there is no contract, there is no legal binding. So Robert will not be liable under the law if Joshua conditions. Assuming Joshue can sue Robert: if Joshua resolutely wants to sue Robert Robert may be responsible before the law. because sending suggestions to Joshue, Robert did not make the deadline. When the store was sold to James, it is recommended to Joshua revoked. Under s.5 (1) CA 1950, a proposal may be withdrawn at any time before its transmitting completed. Since Joshua had not accepted the offer yet, Robert can be recovered as long as Robert served as the owner of the store. However, Robert made a mistake which he did not send recall notices to Joshua. According s.6 (a) CA 1950, a proposal was withdrawn by the communication of the withdrawal notice to the other proposals. Therefore, the proposal is not withdrawn and the proposal is still open. If Robert was withdrawing his proposal, he had informed Joshua that he was withdrawing the proposal. If based on the above, while Joshue accepted the request of Robert, this is still the effective acceptance because Robert did not give a timeframe for their suggestions and do not tell Joshua acceptance has expired. Conclusion: in general, between Robert and Joshua no contract and
đang được dịch, vui lòng đợi..