A contract is an agreement between two or more parties containing legally enforceable promises. A suit should be preceded by the jury's consideration of whether there was a contract in existence. Express and implied contract are the two major types of contracts that are enforceable by law. An express contract is agreed intentionally between parties either verbally or in the form of writing. Differently, in an implied term, the parties did not agree on the terms, but they were added by the court or a statute ( Smits, 2017, p. 28) . When one party sue the other for breach of contract, the court firsts assess whether a contract existed based on four elements of a contract. First, an offer is a crucial element of a contract whereby one party make a promise to do or refrain from undertaking a particular action in the future. Second, consideration is another principle of an agreement which involves a precious promise in exchange for a particular action or non-action in the future ( Dyson, Goudkamp & Wilmot, 2019, p. 8) . Acceptance indicates the third element during the formation of a contract. In the case of a counteroffer, the parties have to engage new terms which binds the contract. Last, the principle of intention to create legal relations creates a legally binding agreement. A letter of intent or a memorandum of understanding is preliminary documents that are essential in preventing any arising intention despite been morally binding ( Austen-Baker, 2017, p. 8) . The analysis scenario one on the formation of contracts will consider the above for elements. Also, factors of verification, importance, time and relevant skills and knowledge of the parties will be considered when deciding whether there were binding contracts.
Following the terms and principals of a contract, Ken has a legally binding contract with Tony. Based on the agreement, Ken made an offer of above £1000 which Tony met by offering £1500 for the car. Following Ken's direction, Tony made a call where the two agreed on the terms of the contract, including final price. According to ( Dyson et al. (2017, p. 8), an offer must be specific, complete, and capable of acceptance and have an intention of binding by acceptance. In this case, the terms of contract binding Tony and Ken included making a call and placing an offer of above £1000. They fulfilled the element of consideration where Tony agreed to buy the car at the agreed price without failing Ken who desperately needed to buy a shiny new silver Porsche 911 as soon as possible. The parties met the legal element of acceptance ( Fortunelaw, 2012,n.p) . Acceptance is proof that the contract was accepted unambiguously through words, performance or deeds ( Smits, 2017, p. 58) . In this case, Tony made a call and accepted to purchase the car at £1500, which was £500 above the amount required by Ken. Through a phone call, the two parties agreed on the price, and other terms of contract and Ken immediately accepted to sell the car to Tony.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The statement made by Ken when selling the vehicle satisfies the factor of importance in a deal. "New car needed to impress a girlfriend. Car for sale in good condition. Offers in the region of £1000 welcome. Call or send a letter to Old Car Guy, Desperate Street, Lonely Town." The statement os sale by Ken is an assurance of a contract. The time in which Tony made a call to buy the car is closer to the statement, and thus it falls under terms of the agreement. Therefore, based on the factors and conditions of contracts, Ken has a legally binding contract with Tony.
Based on the principals of the formation of a contract, Ken does not have a legally binding contract with Bruce. Ken and Bruce only had a representation which is not part of a contract. Although Ken had stated that any interested party to make a call or send a letter to Old Car Guy, Desperate Street, Lonely Town, that was a preliminary negotiation of advertisement. A contract is not formed when a prospective customer like Bruce respond to terms since it is only an invitation or request on the offer whereby Ken is free to decide whom to sell the car to. When entering into a contract, the time frame or urgency is crucial. Based on Ken's statement, it is clear that he desperately needed to sell the car immediately. The first individual to make a call or letter which fall under the price limit was likely to purchase the vehicle. Bruce only wrote a letter accepting the offer made by Ken, and he was willing to buy the car at £950. Due to delay in postal services, Bruce letter was delivered days later after Ken had already struck a deal with Tony and sold the car. In this case, Ken had no legally binding contract with Bruce. According to Smits (2017, p. 68), a legally binding contract requires the agreement of acceptance from both parties, which was lacking in the case of Ken and Bruce. There was no agreement of acceptance since Bruce only sent a letter which arrived late; thus the two parties could not settle at a final deal. For any contract to be binding, the involved partied need to make an offer and the offer has to be accepted by all parties, and a promise to pay for the car is made ( Dyson et al., 2017.p. 13) . The court of law would decide the case in favour of Ken that since he never received the letter on time. Also, the amount stated in the letter was below what Ken had asked ( D’Agostino & Lisciandra, 2017, p. 11). Also, the UK court of law would conclude that Bruce and Ken's case was just a preliminary negotiation, an advertisement or price quotation, which is only an invitation to make an offer and not an offer itself.
Ken has a legally binding express contract with Barbie since all elements of a contract are present. The marriage contract between Ken and Barbie was made on the promise that Barbie will marry Ken if he buys her a silver Porsche 911. In this case, the terms for entering into a marriage contract was based on a car. Ken has to get a new vehicle to Barbie who on the other hand, agreed to enter into contract hence satisfying the element of acceptance. Also, Ken offered to pay £1000 for fuel and the maintenance of the car, which was part of the agreement. Acceptance has to mirror the terms of the offer from both parties, and if one party is unsatisfied with the offer, the acceptance is rejected or become counteroffer ( Smits, 2017, p. 128) . Ken was satisfied with selling his old three-wheeled car and but a shiny new silver Porsche 911 to impress his girlfriend. Barbie was satisfied with the new car and thus was willing to marry Ken. There was no other set condition for the agreement to restrict how Barbie will use the vehicle or whom she will ride within the car. The action of Ken to honour the terms of the contract because a third party took a ride in the new Porsche 911 was a breach of contract ( Fortunelaw. 2012, n.p) . The court will judge in favour of Barbie since she adhered to the terms of the contract, and Ken's action was a breach of an earlier agreement. Besides, the breach of contract grants the innocent party the right to terminate the contract. However, based England law on marriage, the commission argues that parties should be free to terminate an engagement if they feel unsatisfied ( Cartwright, 2016, p. 109) . The two parties did not take adequate time to think over their marriage decision which was only bound by love for a new car by Barbie and one-side love on the side of Ken.
In summary, the legal problem in the case of Ken, Tony, Bruce, and Barbie falls satisfy the requirements of the formation of a contract. The different agreements that Ken has with both Barbie and Tony meet the four elements of the formation of a contract. Ken and Tony entered into a legally binding contract when Bruce called Ken to confirm that he would buy the car for £1500. On the other hand, Ken and Barbie agreed the moment Ken bought a shiny new silver Porsche 911 and Barbie proposed to marry him. The contract became legally binding after marriage. There is no legally binding contract between Ken and Bruce since Ken did not receive the letter on time to decide whether to accept the offer of £950. If the conditions are not met, then the contract will not be binding because a legally binding agreement must satisfy all the four requirements.
References
Austen-Baker, R., 2017. Implied terms in English contract law . Edward Elgar Publishing.
Cartwright, J., 2016. Contract law: An introduction to the English law of contract for the civil lawyer . Bloomsbury Publishing.
D’Agostino, E. and Lisciandra, M., 2017. Binding and Non-Binding Contracts: A Theoretical Appraisal. Review of Law & Economics , 14 (2).
Dyson, A.D., Goudkamp, J. and Wilmot-Smith, F., 2017. Thinking in terms of contract defences.
Fortunelaw. 2012. Back To Basics – The Formation Of A Contract . [online] Available at: <https://www.fortunelaw.com/back-to-basics-the-formation-of-a-contract/> [Accessed 9 June 2020].
Peel, E. and Treitel, G.H., 2007. The law of contract (pp. 1-2). London: Sweet & Maxwell.
Smits, J.M. ed., 2017. Contract law: a comparative introduction . Edward Elgar Publishing.i
