案例分析答题模板样题—std.pptVIP

Contract Law 　　　　- Case Analysis Module Case of IRAC （1） Alan bought a field from Bill, after Bill told him that it was big enough for 6 horses. Bill had never kept horses there himself, however. In fact it was only big enough for two horses. Module Case of IRAC （1） Issue: - misrepresentation Is contract void because of misrepresentation? Rule (set out the law): - This question is about misrepresentation. A misrepresentation is a statement of fact which is a material inducement to enter into a contract. It may make a contract voidable. It must be a statement of Fact., not opinion. (Bisset v Wilkinson) (crucial case) Module Case of IRAC （1） Application of Law: In this case, Bill is only expressing an opinion as he has never kept horses in the field himself, so this is not representation of a fact. Conclusion: - Alan cannot claim misrepresentation, the contract is valid. Training of IRAC (2) Fact: 　 Tony offered to sell his laptop to Gina for $500. Gina said she would buy it if she could raise the money. Tony said he would wait until Sunday to allow her to find the money. However, on Friday Stacey offered Tony $600 for the laptop and Tony accepted Stacy’s offer and sold it to him. Tony tried to ring Gina to tell her the table had already been sold so she could not buy it. Gina’s sister answered the phone and took the message, but forgot to tell Gina. On Sunday Gina arrived at Tony’s flat with the money. Issue: offer and acceptance is there contract between parties because of an effective acceptance from Gina? Training of IRAC (2) Rule: The offeror can withdraw (revoke) an offer at any time before it is accepted. Dickinson v Dodds (1876) p71 Acceptance is “A final and unconditional acceptance of the terms of the offer”. To be legally binding, three rules must fulfil: 1. must be a mirror image of the Offer 2. must be firm : absolute, unconditional 3. communicated to the offeror; An offer can be accepted