1. Mr. Koiki, a Nigerian while on his way from Malaysia to Nigeria lost his Lenovo laptop on transit. All his efforts to locate the lost Laptop proved abortive. He later reported the matter to security personnel at the Muritala Muhammed International Airport, Lagos but all efforts by the officers to recover the laptop was to no avail. Because of some important document in the Laptop, Mr Koiki placed adverts in Nigeria newspaper that “whoever finds the lost Laptop shall be rewarded with the sum of #200,000.00. Mall. Kasali who had read one of the newspapers later found the lost laptop and returned same to Mr. Koiki who refused to pay Mall. Kasali.
a. Advise the parties on the form of contract, acceptance, and consideration involved
b. Clearly examine the position of the law assuming Mall. Kasali has returned the lost Laptop before he became aware of the reward and Mr. Koiki refused to pay
2. Past consideration as been dubbed bad consideration because of its failure to fulfill the essential requirement of a valid consideration. The question, however, remains whether there are instances when bad consideration can be made good. Explain the concept of past consideration and discuss whether it could be made good under any circumstance
3. Aisha is the owner of a bicycle, she offers to sell the bicycle which, according to her, “is in a very good condition” to Johnson for fifteen thousand, Johnson “accepted” to buy the bicycle but for fourteen thousand. Aisha ignored Johnson after receiving the letter and sold the bicycle to Dele for fifteen thousand. Johnson later becomes aware of the sale to sale. He now intends to sue Aisha for breach of contract. Citing relevant case(s) does he have a good case?
In (a) above, will your answer be different if Aisha had written Johnson that she would collect fourteen thousand and later went on to sell the bicycle to Dele refers to case law to support your answer.
4. Read the following scenario and advised the parties accordingly
a. At a public auction of a Mazda 626 saloon car, Miss Ifedolapo bidded #1.6 million which turned out to be the highest bid. However, before the auctioneer hammer could fall, Miss Ifedolapo withdrew her bid. The auctioneer contended that Miss Ifedolapo, by being the highest bidder has already accepted to buy the car at that price. Citing relevant case(s) and statutory provision, advise the auctioneer.
b. Toheeb entered shoprite and went straight to the red label section. He put ten bottles of wine into his basket. At the checkout point however, he was told by the attendant that those wine were reserved for some V.I.Ps and that he could not buy them. Toheeb argued that he had already accepted the shoprite offer to sell those bottles of red label to him and that and that there was no going back on that. As a law student, advise Toheeb with the aid of decided case(s)
c. While in the cab to school, Fatia was given a catalogue containing available products and their prices at FEMTECH office, Ilorin. She was fascinated by their Tecno Camon C8 that she quickly rushed down to their Tanke office. She was however told that Camon C8 was no longer available. She threatened to sue them for breach of contract because according to her, FEMTECH made her an offer which she was ready to accept. Relying on judicial authority, advise Fathia
5. An offer can be terminated before it is accepted by an offeree, discuss three ways an offer can be terminated
ANSWERS
1.
a. The question borders on unilateral contract.
A contract has been defined to mean an agreement which the law will enforce. Unilateral contract as a form of contract has been defined to mean an agreement to perform an act in exchange for a promise recognized by the law as held in the case of Carlill v. Carbolic smoke ball co.
Like all other forms of contract, unilateral contract possess all elements of a contract which are offer, acceptance, consideration, intention, and capacity to contract, however, the major elements that always strive for determination especially this case is offer, acceptance, and consideration.
While an offer means the communication of willingness of one party (the offeror) to form a binding agreement to the other party (offeree) which the law recognized. An acceptance means a final and unequivocal assent to the terms of an offer communicated to the offeror. In a unilateral contract, an offer can be made to the whole world, class of people or society. It acceptance took place immediately after the act in question was performed by any person capable of accepting the offer.
Consideration, on the other hand, has been defined in the case of Currie v Misa as some rights, interest, profit or benefit accruing to the one party or some forbearance, detriment, loss or responsibility, giving, suffered, or undertaken by the other. Simply put, consideration is an exchange of an act or promised recognized by the law. The consideration available in a unilateral contract is attached to the actual performance of the act in question e.g. by giving information or finding a lost object as rightly held in the case of Dela Bere v Pearson and Carill v Carbolic smokeball co.
Applying this position of law to the case at hand, the contract between Mr. Koiki and Mall. Kasali is a unilateral contract which is recognized by the law with its essential elements. The offer existed when Mr. Koiki placed adverts in Nigerian Newspaper that whoever finds the lost Laptop shall be rewarded with the sum of #200,000.00. The acceptance took place when Mall. Kasali found the Laptop and returned same. The consideration furnished by Mall. Kasli is the act of finding the laptop and returning it
In conclusion, Mr. Koiko is hereby advised to pay the sum of #200,000.00 to Mall. Kasali as agreed because a valid contract existed between them while Mall. Kasali is advised to demand his reward from Mr. Koiko, if he refuses to pay, he should approach the court for redress as his chance of success is high.
b. The question borders on acceptance in ignorant of an offer
Acceptance as earlier defined means a final and unqualified expression of assent to the terms of the offer. Therefore it is trite in law that a person who is not aware of an offer cannot accept same. This position is well spelt out in the case Fitch v. Snedakar when it was held that a reward could not be claimed by one who did not know that it has been offered.
Applying this position to the case at hand, if Mall. Kasali has returned the Laptop before he became aware of the reward, he cannot claim the reward as a matter of right as that will constitute accepting an offer one is ignorant of.
In conclusion, Mall. Kasali cannot get benefit from an offer he is not aware of so he should not be too eager to get the reward but rather beg Mr. Koiko for some benefit if he wishes.
2. The question borders on past consideration and the exception.
Consideration has been defined as defined according to the case of currie v Misa as some rights, interest, profit or benefit accruing to the one party or some forbearance, detriment, loss or responsibility, giving, suffered, or undertaken by the other.
A consideration is said to be past when the act considered as consideration has been done in the past before the existence of the new contract. Simply put, it is the act of relying on past act to serve as consideration for new obligation.
Past consideration has been dubbed to be a bad consideration and it is not actionable even if it was the previous transaction that induced the new contract. This potion has been uphold in the case of Akinzua II, Oba of Benin v Benin Divisional Counsil and the case of Att. Gen of Bendel State v. Okwumabua where it was held that a past consideration is as good as no consideration and therefore the contract is not enforceable.
However, it is trite in law that to every general rule, there must be an exception. The principle of past consideration to be a bad consideration is not an exception to this principle. It has been held in the case of Re Casey’s patents, Stewart v. Casey and Pau On v. Lau Yiu Long that before a past consideration can be regarded valid, three conjunctive elements must co-exist which are:
* Prior request by the promisor
* Prior understanding by the parties that the service will be paid for
* The benefit must be legal (enforceable)
By this exception, it means when the promisor engages the service of the promisee in an act which ordinarily will make the promisee incur expenses and there is understanding by the parties that the promisor will reimburse the promisee for the expenses incur on the service render which is legal, the consideration will not be regarded as past consideration but instead valid consideration as held in the case of Lampleigh v. Brathwait
In conclusion, although a past consideration is not regarded as consideration in law as it is a probono act or been exhausted in the previous transaction however it can serve as valid consideration when the above elements existed.
3. The question borders on counter offer.
Counter offer can be defined as an amendment, qualification to the original terms of an offer. It has been held in the case of Hyde v. Wrench and chief S.A Okubule v. Anor Thomas A. Oyagbola and Ors that once there is any modification, qualification, alteration or amendment to the terms of an offer, the purported acceptance thus becomes a fresh offer which is open for the original offeror, now the offeree to either accept or reject.
Applying the position of laws to the case at hand, the act of Johnson to offer #14000 to the offer of #15000 is counter offer which means a new offer that can either be accepted or rejected by Aisha
In conclusion, Johnson does not have a valid claim because Aisha’s offer to sell the bicycle at #15,000 has been terminated by the counter offer of Johnson when he offer #14,000 which therefore gives Aisha the right to either accept or reject the new offer of Johnson.
The question bothers on whether counter offer can be accepted or not. As earlier discussed, counter offer constitutes a new offer which gives the original offeror the right to either accepts or reject the new offer. Like any other legal offer, a counter offer is capable of being accepted and such will create a binding contract when accepted by the initial offeror now offeree. This position has been upheld in the case of Oni v. Communication Associates (Nig.) Ltd. When a counter offer has been accepted, the parties are bound by their agreement and any breach is redressable in the court.
Apply the position of the law to the current issue, if Aisha has accepted the counter offer (new offer) of Johnson, a valid contract would have existed between them and Aisha would have been hold responsible for breaching the contract
In conclusion, Aisha will be held liable for breach of contract if she accepts Johnson offer and subsequently sell the bicycle to Dele.
4.
a. The question borders on invitation to treat particularly auction sale
An invitation to treat can be defined as a phenomenon preliminary to the offer which itself is not capable of acceptance.
An auction sale is defined as an invitation to treat whereby the bidders are the offeror and the offer is accepted when the auctioneer nailed his hammer.
It has been held in the case of Payne v Cave and Adebaje v Conde that an auctioneer request for a bid is not an offer but an invitation to treat. The bid itself is the offer and the acceptance occurs when the auctioneer’s hammer falls.
Applying the position of law to the current issue, Miss Ifedolapo’s offer would have been binding on her had it been the auctioneer’s hammer fall before she withdrew her offer as mere fact of being the highest bidder does not impose obligation on the bidder until it is accepted by nailing the hammer
In conclusion, thus there exist no contract between auctioneer and Miss Ifedolapo and the auctioneer is hereby advice not to waste his time and property in pursuing a vague case
b. The question borders on invitation to treat particularly display of goods
It has been held in the case of Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v. Boots Cash Chemists and Lasky v. Economy Grocery Store that the display of goods in shelves in a shop, supermarket, self service shops e.t.c. constitute an invitation to treat which is merely a preliminary to making an offer and not an offer.
Applying the position of law to the case at hand, mere display of goods on the shelve does not mean an offer but merely an invitation to make an offer, the offer is made by Toheeb at the check-out point and the attendant can either accept or reject it
Conclusively, Toheeb is thereby advice not to argue ignorantly and waste his resources in pursuing a baseless case
c. The question borders on invitation to treat particularly advertisement of goods in a catalogue.
It has been held in the case of Grainger & son v. Gough that advertisement of goods in a catalogue is an invitation for interested buyer to make an offer which can either by accepted or rejected
Accordingly, the display of product in a catalogue giving to Fatia which she can accept but an invitation for her to make an offer which FEMTECH can either accept or reject
To this end, Fatia is advice to get his desire phone from another shop or buy another product available and not try to institute action against FEMTECH on that basis as such is groundless.
5. The question borders on termination of an offer
An offer has been defined as a definite undertaking or promise made by one party with the intention that it shall become binding on the party making it as soon as it is accepted by the party to whom it is address
An offer must be clear, definite and unequivocal with the intention to be contractually bound by the obligation arising from it by the party making it however this intention to contract can be terminated before it is accepted by the offeree. Three of the instances are
a. Revocation
b. Lapse of time
c. Rejection
Revocation: Offeror can revoke an offer made to the offeree before it is accepted by the offeree even when there is time limitation to accept the offer and the time has not expire. This position is well spelt out in the case of Routledge v. Grant however there consideration has been meted to keep the offer within specific period, the offer cannot be revoke as held in the case of Mountford v Scott.
To constitute a revocation, the revocation must be communicated to the offeree before the offer is accepted by him, once the offer I accepted, the revocation is invalid as held in the case of Dickinson v. Dodds.
Lapse of time: an offer is deemed terminated when it is not accepted within the stipulated period of acceptance as held in the case of Ramsgate Victoria hotel v. Montifiore. Where there is no stipulation has to the time frame for acceptance, reasonable time is considered. What constitute a reasonable time depends on nature of offer, the subject matter of the contract and circumstance of each case as held in the case of Loring v. City of Boston
Rejection: when an offer has been rejected by the offeree or the terms of the offer has been altered as in counter offer, the offer has been terminated. However the rejection must be communicated to the offeror before it can terminate the offer. Thus, if the offeree changes his mind before the notice of rejection reaches the offeror, he can validly accept the offer provided the notification of acceptance is received by the offeror before the notification of rejection.
In conclusion, as everything has a definite end so as an offer does which can be terminated by revocation, lapse of time or rejection.
No comments:
Post a Comment