INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENT COVER SHEET

Please complete and attach this form to your assignment before handing it in or placing it in the
Assignment Box outside the Student Services Counter 04-01, Level 4 of SMa City Campus.

Surname Given name/s Student number

1
PETER Isaac 31398297

Lecturer’s first name and surname Lecture day Full time/Part time Unit code

Steven SHAW PART TIME MBS502

Assignment number (i.e. 1,2,3 or short answer) Due date Date submitted

14th February 2011; 4.00pm 14th February 2011; 1.00am

Assignment 2
If the given name by which your lecturer knows you differs from your name on university records, you should
indicate both names above.

Your assignment should meet the following requirements.

Please confirm this by ticking  the boxes before submitting your assignment.
My  is double-spaced and clearly legible
assignment:  is written on one side of page only
 has the pages numbered
 has a wide margin (4 cm) on left-hand side of page
 has the first page clearly labelled with my full name, unit code and tutor’s
full name.
and  I have retained a copy of my assignment
 I have completed and signed the declaration below
All forms of plagiarism, cheating and unauthorised collusion are regarded seriously
by the University and could result in penalties including failure in the unit and
possible exclusion from the University. If you are in doubt, please contact the Unit
Coordinator

Declaration
Except where I have indicated, the work I am submitting in this assignment is my own work and has
not been submitted for assessment in another unit.

Signed: _________________________________________________

OFFICE USE ONLY

Date received Marked by Mark/Grade

Recorded by Date marked

14 Feb 2011
Dear Henry,

RE: Henry Loh dispute over sale of land

I am writing with regards to your question as to whether you can enforce the deal you
made with Guan Kai’s uncle concerning purchase of his land at Lim Chu Kang road. As I
don’t remember his name, for ease of explanation, let’s call him Albert. Based on our phone
conversation, I will explain the matter by breaking down the information in bite sizes. I will
also give the legal explanation as well as cite similar cases lawyers refer to in making their
case. You could further read the cases on the internet if you are interested.

In my opinion, based on our conversation, you would not be able to enforce the deal
you made. For a start, I would assume when you use the word deal, you mean agreement. An
agreement can only be enforced when it is a contract. My apologies if I have confused you, as
many people use ‘agreement’ and ‘contract’ interchangeably. From a legal perspective, they
are different. An agreement refers to a ‘legally binding promise’ and arises when there is a
meeting of the minds in that an offer made by one party is accepted by the other. It is only
enforceable when it is a contract. A contract on the other hand contains six (6) elements.
They are:

1) Intention
This refers to both parties having the same intention when coming into the contract. We can
assume that there is intention between Albert and yourself.

2) Agreement
This refers to whether there is an offer made and an acceptance of the offer. This is an area
we will be looking in greater details in this letter in order to establish if an agreement was
even present in the first place.

3) Capacity
This refers to the legal and mental capacity of the parties involved. Based on how you talked
about him, it can be reasonable to conclude that Albert has the mental and legal capacity to
make the contract. If, for some reason, he has past history of mental illness, then this might
be an area of contention and might void the contract.

4) Consideration
This refers to something of value given or received in return for a promise. In this situation it
is the money you are willing to part for the property owned by Albert.

5) Legal
This refers to the contract made within the boundaries of the law and does not deal with
illegal activity. In your situation, I would recommend you check with the local authority of
your plan to build a petrol station and restaurant as there are laws governing the use of land.
As Albert mentioned that he plans to build a factory, the area might have been designated for
industrial use. I am concerned about your source of information on the possible building of
the 2nd causeway, since you mentioned it came from a friend in the ministry who said it was
‘hush hush’.

6) Consent
This refers to both parties giving their genuine consent without pressure from one party to the
other to agree. As far as I can see, there is no consent between Albert and yourself thus far.

Was there an agreement i.e an offer and acceptance?

An area I believe we should focus our attention is to determine if there was an

agreement between Albert and yourself in the first place. From our conversation, the offer
was first made by you and not Albert when you offered to pay Albert $800,000.00 for the
property.

Allow me to distinguish the difference between an offer and an invitation to treat as

there is legal implication to it. An invitation to treat is merely a willingness to negotiate or
accept an offer that may be made (Fisher v Bell). Albert issued an invitation to treat when he
said he is thinking of selling it for nothing less than $1 million.

An offer on the other hand is a firm commitment to make an exchange (Carlill v

Carbolic Smoke Ball Co.) which you clearly indicated. Albert did not give you a reply and
therefore you left the offer open when you told him to think about it.

Later when he called you and said he would take $900,000.00 for selling his property,
it is a counter-offer. A counter-offer is a rejection of your original offer of $800,000.00 and
he has created a new offer. An offer that has been rejected cannot be revived (Hyde v
Wrench). Albert is now the offeror.
Who was the offer made to?

It is also important to note who Albert’s offer was made to. If Albert’s offer was made
to a class of people (i.e buyer) and not specifically you (Lewis v Avery), then whoever is
able to accept Albert’s offer would create an agreement with him. If the offer was made
specifically to you, then Albert would not be able to make the same offer to anyone else until
you rejected his offer or unless Albert revoked his offer to you before you accepted it (Byrne
& Co. V Van Tienhoven). In your specific situation, I am more likely to believe that Albert
made the offer to a class of people because he did not indicate that he only wants to deal with
you and no one else.

Albert also asked you to deal with Guan Kai. In law, when the principal (Albert)
appoints someone (Guan Kai) to deal on his behalf, this person is known as an agent and are
bound by law on agency. An agent would have the legal authority to deal on the principal’s
behalf. This means the principal has given his authority to deal on the matter to the agent thus
being bound. The agent will also bear legal responsibility with regards to the dealing. An
example would be a real estate agent who deals on behalf of the house owner.

In contrast, had Albert asked you to only communicate your decision through Guan
Kai this means that Guan Kai is only the messenger and not his agent. Communicating an
acceptance through a third party is accepted as long as the person is a reliable source to the
offeror (Dickinson v Dodds). In this instance, Guan Kai is a reliable source because he is the
nephew.

In your situation, I am likely to believe that Albert led you to believe that Guan Kai
represents him since he told you that he wanted you to deal with Guan Kai instead of him.
Therefore Guan Kai would have the authority to deal on Albert’s behalf (International
Harvester Co. V Carrigan). This means if we find that there is an agreement between the
Guan Kai and yourself, then you could possibly take enforcement action against Guan Kai.

You emailed Guan Kai that you are agreeable to the sum of $900,000.00 but would
need to make it in two instalments. Initially I took your statement “as long as he agrees” as
your way of requesting for information if the terms were negotiable. This would mean that
you had not made a counter-offer and Albert’s offer still stands (Stevenson, Jacques & co. V
Mc Lean). In this situation, if you had handed a cheque for the amount of $900,000.00 it
would be accepted that you have accepted Albert’s offer and you could possible enforce the
contract because you have given consideration in the form of a cheque.

Upon closer examination, I am led to believe that when you said “as long as he
agrees”, you made a counter-offer by wanting Albert to accept the payment in two
installments. As such, your counter-offer is a rejection of his offer which cannot be revived
and you have now made a new offer.

Because it is a new offer, when Guan Kai told you that he ‘received your acceptance’,
he actually received your offer. Furthermore, there is no indication to say that Guan Kai
accepted your offer. From the conversation, it seems that Guan Kai preferred that Albert
make the final decision. Albert is now in the position to either accept or reject your offer. If
Albert accepts your offer, he would need to communicate it to you clearly. You can’t imply
his silence as an acceptance of your offer (Felthouse v Bindley). Therefore there is no
acceptance hence no agreement.

Albert is free to deal with the people from the ministry because his offer is to a group
of people. Furthermore, because there is no indication that he accepted your offer, he is free
to deal with them. His action of making an agreement with the people from the ministry is an
indication of his rejection of your offer.

I hope the above explanation gives you an appreciation of the legal matter to your
situation. Based on how I understand your situation, I don’t believe we are able to enforce
your deal because there was no agreement. If I have misunderstood you or if there are any
other information that has not been communicated, you might want to give me a call again
and for us to relook at this situation of yours once again.

Because we have been friends for a long time, I won’t be charging you for my advice
but just to let you know that such an advice would cost my clients $1,300.00 based on our
charge out rate of $130 per hour.

Thanks and let me know if there is anything else I can do for you.

Sincerely,

_______________
Ah Siang
Managing Partner