Early in January, Andrew, a computer dealer, sent out a circular letter to some local trade customers listed on his data base. The letter advertised a new computer system for small business use. The price was £4,000, which included delivery and installation. The letter also stated that a special promotional price of £3,200 would be applied to ” . . . any order we are notified of by the end of January”.
Later that month, Andrew decided the promotional price was too generous. On 20th January he posted a second circular letter to the same businesses telling them that the discounted price was no longer available. The letters were not delivered until the 2nd February because of an error at the local postal sorting office. Bashir posted a letter on Thursday 28th January ordering a computer system for £3,200.
Cherry telephoned Andrew on the afternoon of Friday 29th January to place her order and to ask about delivery. There was no response because Andrew’s business observed half-day closing on Fridays. Cherry therefore sent her order by fax the same day. Cherry received an auto-notification that her fax was delivered at 4.15pm on the 29th January. When Andrew reopened his business premises on Monday morning, he found Bashir’s letter and Cherry’s fax message. Andrew refused to apply the discounted price to Bashir and Cherry’s orders.
Bashir and Cherry want to know if Andrew is in breach of contract.
*Focus on the offer and acceptance issues only*
3 Instructions for Completing the Examination: ‐ Use an IRAC structure to write a legal argument that addresses Bashir/Cherry’s question
‐ You should write your answer in paragraphs and do not use section headings. ‐ Your advice should be structured around 3 broad legal issues the scenario raises:
1) Offer/Invitation to Treat
2) Revocation
3) Instant and lagged forms of communication ‐ Identify from the facts where, when, and why these broad legal issues arise. ‐ For each broad issue identify, cite, explain, and apply relevant legal authorities (i.e., cases) to support your argument. ‐ Compare your definition of relevant legal rules to the facts.
Explain and discuss whether the facts meet the requirements of the rule or not. ‐ Write a conclusion which states:
1) Whether Andrew is in breach of contract or not
2) And give reasons why you think he is/is not in breach of contract. ‐ You must use relevant legal authorities (i.e., cases) and ensure the full citations are OSCOLA compliant in the footnotes. ‐ You must include a full bibliography of all the sources used/cited in your legal argument and this bibliography must be OSCOLA compliant. The words used in your footnote citations and bibliography are not included in the 1,300- word limit (any words written over the word limit will not be read or graded)
