Offer recording under Section 2(a) of Malaysian Legal System questions, whether is there offer made by one party to the another. Just like if I'm offering to sell my phone but at the same time, this can be misleaded with INVITATION TO TREAT. Whereby, someone who wanted to sell the phone is just testing the market and do not wholly wanted to sell the phone as for example. With that, the next step under Section 2(b) will be ACCEPTANCE. With regard to that, we are taught to understand, upon an offer, is there any acceptance made and from there to conclude whether the agreement is on or not.
As for the scope thus far, I will review back one of the group activities that me and my friends did regarding the story of Jay.
The excerpt is as below;
One day, Jay saw a banner hanging in front of her favourite cassette outlet in Alamanda which reads: "BIG SALE! LATEST TOO PHAT'S ALBUM IS UP FOR GRAB WITH 50% DISCOUNT! LIMITED STOCK! HURRY, HURRY, HURRY!" After reading it, Jay immediately jumped in the outlet and said she wanted that album at the said discounted price. But to her disappointment, the shop owner said that the cassette is now sold at normal price. Can Jay sue the shop owner for breach of contract? Discuss according to Contracts Act 1950 and relevant decided case(s)
As this is the first time for us to do such activity, we were rather do not where to start. Our lecturer mentioned that for every justification you made, you have to argued with reasons (as usual), justification from previous cases (Stare Decisis) and according to the Malaysian Legal System. Thus, I suggested we come into a role play to debate the situation.Jay: Hi I will like to purchase the Too Phat's album at that stated price.
S/Owner: I'm sorry, it is now selling at normal price already.
Jay: Why is it so, come on, you guys put up the ads and you should be responsible for that?
S/Owner: (Thinking) Actually we did write Limited Stock.
Jay: Then since the stock is finished, you should just take the banner down
S/Owner: (Thinking) Yea, I was just about to take off the banner
Jay: (rather not satisfied) How many amounts of stock is your limited stock? 10? 5? 1?
S/Owner: This is up to our company's discretion and definitely it is Privacy and Confidential.
Jay: Does it mean PnC which include selling only 1 as limited stock?
S/Owner: This is truly our company policy to fix the amount, so we cannot disclose it.
Jay: I can sue you regarding this you know, it is like a con case already.
S/Owner: We will try our best to maintain minimal level of insecurity for your side, but this is not within our reach.
Thus, from our debate we imagine ourselves in that situation, feeling pissed and angry at such situation. But does LAW sides on our side?
The situation goes like this , first of all, if this things is brought up to the court or consulting a lawyer, the first question is, is there an OFFER made? The answer is NO, what the banner states is merely an INVITATION TO TREAT. Invitation to treat is not an ofer, it is sort of preliminary negotiation to buy something. You will be surprised that, Goods displayed in the shops with price tag, advertisement in the newspaper and auction sale and tender. Although Jay accepted that deal, but that wasn't an offer making the acceptance not ABSOLUTE.
In refer to the previous case, it will be Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. Ltd Case whereby an ads by the defendant (the company) stating that whoever who takes the medicine and do not recover, will be given 1000 English pounds. However, when Carlill the plaintiff, who did not recover from her influenza sued the company, this case was brought up and results in saying that as INVITATION TO TREAT. (CASE LIKE HYDE AND WRENCH CAN BE JUSTIFIED AS WELL)
Thus, from there, we get to know that with Advertisement flaunting our minds and heart, we should be aware that an offer and acceptance is the initial steps to make every legally binding contract. Lessons Learnt!
No comments:
Post a Comment