Cases Responses

1. What legal issue(s) does this case illustrate (i.e. why is this case in the chapter)?

· Counter offer.

· Promissory estoppel

· Offer rejection

1. What are all of the elements of the main legal rule that this case illustrates? For instance, if the case is about undue influence, list ALL of the elements that the court in this case said had to be proven by the plaintiff.

· Counter offer. an offer made in response to a previous offer by the other party during negotiations for a final contract,

· Promissory estoppel, Promisor made a promise significant enough to cause the promise to act on it, Promise relied upon the promise, Promise suffered a significant detriment, Relief can only come in the form of the promisor fulfilling the promise

· Offer rejection. The rejection of an offer terminates the offeree’s power of acceptance

Repeat 2. For each issue raised. (For example, a case may discuss 1. Whether there is an implied-in-fact contract, and II. Whether the UCC or common law applied. If so, you will repeat 2. For each of these two issues.)

For Giannotti V. Cornelly the counter offer given persists as a rejection to original offer and terminates the power resulting from the counter offer.

1. Expand Perspective, Gain Interpersonal Understanding, and Critically Assess Implications. Judgement was for the defendant. This is because his clause in the mortgage was only an offer. This was unilateral until accepted by the offeree.

2. Prevailing party’s point of view:

The addition to the subject under the offer were not in the first offer. Hence the mortgage addition did not form a binding contract as the offer stands as a one party affair without consent of the offeree.

1. What legal arguments were made by the prevailing party?

There was reluctant agreement to the offer. There also was information missing on the part of the offer.

1. What facts, legal reasoning, social policy, and ethical principles would support a ruling for the prevailing party?

Contract is complete when the subject stands in the original state without any material damages or alteration to the object.

The offeree should only be liable to contracts entered without any alteration. The alterations renders the offer unilateral.

1. What were the probable motivations behind the prevailing party’s actions leading up to the dispute? After the dispute?

The mortgage value added from used 124,000 TO used 128,000 was not in the subject contract and therefore stands as addition to the contract and damages the contract enforceability.

4. Losing party’s point of view:

5. What legal arguments were made by the losing party?

That there was a counter offer a second time, this could imply the furniture additions were material subject to the changes in the offer made.

1. What facts, legal reasoning, social policy, and ethical principles would support a ruling for the losing party?

The losing party did not disclose the material alteration to the furniture items. This could be expressly specified in the offer.

1. What were the probable motivations behind the losing party’s actions leading up to the dispute? After the dispute?

The addition in the furniture equipment could contribute to the inflation to the value of the mortgage.

5. Judge’s point of view:

6. How did the court rule on each argument?

The contract was not binding. The adjustment to the property was rendered material hence the contract could not be enforceable.

1. What facts, legal reasoning, social policy, and ethical principles did the court use to support its ruling?

The offer did not include the clause to input the costing on the adjustments to the furniture equipment’s.

1. What were the probable motivations behind the judge’s decision?

The adjustments to the property which the offeree was not privy to was material and could vitiate the contract.

1. Find Recent Developments and Diverse Theories, Synthesize, and Compare

The recent developments are that the contract is a legal binding only when the offeror and the offeree enter into a contract that they share equal information.

6. Different Rules: Pose the question “What if the court adopted a different legal rule?”

The different legal approach was practical only if the both party to the contract shared similar information to the contract on the property adjustments.

1. Search the web for other articles to refer to in your article or call an attorney or business professional who may have experience with this type of issue. Write a brief one-paragraph summary of this case or article:

Harvey v Face [1893] AC 552 Privy Council

Harvey sent a Telegram to face which stated: -“Will you sell us Bumper Hall Pen? Telegraph lowest cash price-answer paid; “Face replied by telegram:-“Lowest price for Bumper Hall Pen £900.”Harvey then replied:-“We agree to buy Bumper Hall Pen for the sum of nine hundred pounds asked by you. Please send us your title deed in order that we may get early possession.”

Held: The Privy Council held that there was no contract concluded between the parties. Face had not directly answered the first question as to whether they would sell and the lowest price stated was merely responding to a request for information not an offer. There was thus no evidence of an intention that the telegram sent by Face was to be an offer. b. Ponder and reflect to compare this case to recent news and cases. This is the really cool part. You will be thinking like a legally astute manager, owner, or professional as you read, analyse and compare cases to draw your conclusions. Some neat ideas to help with your analysis: If the outcomes of the recent cases you found are different, can you make sense of the different outcomes? Are there different legal standards that make for different outcomes? Is there a trend leaning more in favour of a plaintiff or defendant’s position? Are the outcomes the same or different simply because the facts are similar or dissimilar? What accounts for the same or different results? Write your thoughts here:

In the most recent world, the legal standards have been fair to both plaintiff and defendant. The legal outcome on contract cases has been relying on the terms of the engagement in the offer property status.