1. Agreement
Offer
An offer must include an intention to be bound combined with final and certain language that requires no further communication other than acceptance. This is distinguishable from an invitation to treat, which is an invitation to others to make an offer. This distinction is based on the facts of the case. Kelvin’s quotation is the offer, because it included all the necessary details such as price and delivery date, which makes it necessary only for Brie to communicate her acceptance of the quote. While Kelvin could argue that a quotation does not signify an intention to be bound, the law states that the intention is discerned from whether a reasonable person would believe it was an offer. A reasonable person would have found …show more content…
As Kelvin accepted Brie’s offer he performed both acceptance and consideration. Although Kelvin’s performance gains Usain little other than Brie’s happiness, and pride for his good deed, the courts look only at the sufficiency not adequacy of consideration such that even nominal consideration is accepted. As the acceptance of the offer was the consideration Usain asked for, Kelvin’s performance was sufficient consideration.
Existing Legal Duty
Kelvin can enforce consideration despite the fact that he has an existing legal duty under his contract with Brie. This is because a third party may contract a person otherwise under an existing legal duty to do the act so required. Usain is not an agent of Brie as he was given no authority to act on her behalf and was not purporting to, and is therefore a third party.
3. Certainty
The contract is sufficiently certain as the essential terms including price are given. No party has discretion as to performance, and it is sufficiently clear for the courts to enforce.
4. Intention to Create Legal Relations
There is a presumption for enforceability in commercial contexts, depending on whether a reasonable person would agree that the agreement is binding. As Kelvin asked for Usain’s firm promise to give the $1000 upon acceptance of Brie’s contract, a reasonable person would find an intention to create a legal …show more content…
Certainty
The contract is not sufficiently complete because the amount of the bonus is indeterminate and ‘price’ is generally an essential element which would be necessary for an employment contract. The courts would be unable to award this amount at their own determination as there is no external standard for evaluation of ‘the amount they value’ her work, making it uncertain as the courts can’t attribute meaning to it. Additionally, Mistral has made an illusory promise by saying ‘if your work is good” as performance of the bonus is fulfilled at the discretion of the company.
Severance
As courts wish to maintain contracts, the uncertain clause of a contract should be severed if it isn’t essential, based on the intention of the parties and the document as a whole as to the validity without the clause. The bonus clause is severable from the contract because it was additional to the payment of the $3000 agreed upon for her work. Therefore only the bonus clause should be void as it is not essential.
4. Intention to Create Legal Relations
Following the rule set out above, a reasonable person would have found an intention to create legal relations in this commercial
Offer
An offer must include an intention to be bound combined with final and certain language that requires no further communication other than acceptance. This is distinguishable from an invitation to treat, which is an invitation to others to make an offer. This distinction is based on the facts of the case. Kelvin’s quotation is the offer, because it included all the necessary details such as price and delivery date, which makes it necessary only for Brie to communicate her acceptance of the quote. While Kelvin could argue that a quotation does not signify an intention to be bound, the law states that the intention is discerned from whether a reasonable person would believe it was an offer. A reasonable person would have found …show more content…
As Kelvin accepted Brie’s offer he performed both acceptance and consideration. Although Kelvin’s performance gains Usain little other than Brie’s happiness, and pride for his good deed, the courts look only at the sufficiency not adequacy of consideration such that even nominal consideration is accepted. As the acceptance of the offer was the consideration Usain asked for, Kelvin’s performance was sufficient consideration.
Existing Legal Duty
Kelvin can enforce consideration despite the fact that he has an existing legal duty under his contract with Brie. This is because a third party may contract a person otherwise under an existing legal duty to do the act so required. Usain is not an agent of Brie as he was given no authority to act on her behalf and was not purporting to, and is therefore a third party.
3. Certainty
The contract is sufficiently certain as the essential terms including price are given. No party has discretion as to performance, and it is sufficiently clear for the courts to enforce.
4. Intention to Create Legal Relations
There is a presumption for enforceability in commercial contexts, depending on whether a reasonable person would agree that the agreement is binding. As Kelvin asked for Usain’s firm promise to give the $1000 upon acceptance of Brie’s contract, a reasonable person would find an intention to create a legal …show more content…
Certainty
The contract is not sufficiently complete because the amount of the bonus is indeterminate and ‘price’ is generally an essential element which would be necessary for an employment contract. The courts would be unable to award this amount at their own determination as there is no external standard for evaluation of ‘the amount they value’ her work, making it uncertain as the courts can’t attribute meaning to it. Additionally, Mistral has made an illusory promise by saying ‘if your work is good” as performance of the bonus is fulfilled at the discretion of the company.
Severance
As courts wish to maintain contracts, the uncertain clause of a contract should be severed if it isn’t essential, based on the intention of the parties and the document as a whole as to the validity without the clause. The bonus clause is severable from the contract because it was additional to the payment of the $3000 agreed upon for her work. Therefore only the bonus clause should be void as it is not essential.
4. Intention to Create Legal Relations
Following the rule set out above, a reasonable person would have found an intention to create legal relations in this commercial