SAMPLE (SIMPLE) USE OF IRAC FRAMEWORK

Diane is scrolling through Instagram when she sees a sponsored post that reads:

MODELS WANTED!
Looking for girls (18-25yo) to model for upcoming blogshop brand
To become our model send us a DM that says “MODEL”.

Diane has always wanted to pursue modelling so she sends them a message,
“MODEL”. They do not respond.

Diane does not know that the advertising agency’s Instagram account has been
hacked and they do not have access to the messages. They never see Diane’s
message. The agency creates another Instagram account and scrolls through
profiles. They see Diane’s profile and realise she is an aspiring model, and send
her a DM, “Hey, we would love for you to model for us. Let us know.”

Diane receives so many messages every day that she deletes most of them. She
glances at this message and, since the profile does not have any pictures or
details of the agency, she assumes it is a creep and deletes the message.

Identify the legal issues in relation to offer and acceptance.

Think: Issue / Rule / Application / Conclusion

The first issue is whether there was a valid offer when the agency posted
the advertisement on Instagram. An offer defined as a definite promise to be
bound provided that specified terms are accepted (Gay Choon Ing v Loh Sze Ti
Terence). Generally, advertisements are not considered offers and are instead
considered invitations to treat because the advertiser does not intend to be
bound (Partridge v Crittenden). Even though this is an online advertisement, the
same principles will apply because of section 14 of the Electronic Transactions
Act. In the present case, the offer is for the person replying to the advertisement
to model for the agency. That part of the offer is quite clear, but it is not clear
what are the exact terms that are available for acceptance. There are insufficient
details on, for example, how the applicants will be selected or whether and how
much they will be paid. This supports the general rule that the online
advertisement by the agency is not an invitation to treat and that the agency had
no intention to be bound by any responses to this advertisement. Therefore, the
advertisement was not a valid offer.

The second issue is whether Diane’s Instagram DM message to the agency

was a valid offer. Applying the rules discussed above to the present case, Diane’s
message also lacks certainty and does not indicate her intention to be bound as it
is too vague. Her message is more of an expression of interest in modelling.
Therefore, her message was not a valid offer.

[etc, etc…]