LA

W of
Contract
Tutorial 1 :
NOTICE OF REVOCATION
Group Members
NUR AINATUL NADIAH BINTI ZAINUDDIN
060086
NIK AMNEE AMIRAH BINTI MOHAMAD RIZAL
061184

NUR AIN BALQIS BINTI MOHD HILMI

061186
AFNIRASYIHAH BINTI SAIDDIN
061204

NUR ADINI BINTI AB RAHMAN

061234
DATO’ LIONG KEE HUAT v PERMASTULIN SDN BHD

HIGH COURT OF MALAYA, JOHOR BAHRU

TEO ENG SAY J

[SUIT NO: 23NCVC-57-06-2013]

19 JANUARY 2015

[2015] 4 CLJ 321

 Content
ISSUE PRINCIPLE/LAW

01 02 03 04

FACT CONCLUSION
 ISSUE
-Whether there was a binding and enforceable
contract between plaintiff and defendant at 12
April 2013.
 
-Whether the Defendant Could Revoke the
Offer Before 18 April 2013.
 
-Whether requirements for acceptance of offer
fulfilled.
FACT
“
2 April 2013:
The plaintiff offered to purchase the defendant’s land by sending a letter of draft option
for approval to the defendant.

5 April 2013:
Defendant responded by stating the discounted amount and attached a draft option and
draft supplemental letter for approval. 

Later on, the plaintiff reverted the said letter with some proposed amendments to that
draft option. Therefore, the defendant made counter amendments to both draft option
and draft supplemental letter and the plaintiff also made one amendment to the said
drafts.
“
12 April 2013:
Defendant make an acceptance and also attached the clean copy (un-sign) of the
option and supplementary letter with clear specific requirement of action that
had to be done by the plaintiff which was to send 4 copies of the respective
documents that have been duly executed with the option money to the defendant
by 18 April 2013.

13 April 2013:
Through a letter the plaintiff sent to the defendant the option that has been amended
by him without the consent of the defendant. He also attaches the cheque consisting of
the amended sum to the defendant.
 “
14 April 2013:
An email was sent to the plaintiff to revoke the offer or proposal in the email of 12
April 2013.

15 April 2013:

-The defendant sent the letter of revocation and plaintiff officially accept the letter at
9.46am.

-The defendant received the acceptance letter (sign option letter only) with the cheque
from plaintiff officially at 10.00am.
PRINCIPL
E / LAW
“
Section 5(1) Contracts Act 1950
(1) A proposal may be revoked at any time before the communication of its acceptance is
complete as against the proposer, but not afterwards.

Section 6 (c) of Contracts Act 1950

A proposal is revoked by the failure of the acceptor to fulfil a condition precedent to
acceptance.

Section 7(a) Contracts Act 1950

In order to convert a proposal into a promise the acceptance must be absolute and
unqualified;
CONCLUSI
ON
“
-There was no binding and enforceable contract between plaintiff and defendant at
12 April 2013 since plaintiff failed to follow the condition of acceptance made by
the defendant.
 
-As the plaintiff do not follow the condition set up by the defendant, the earlier
acceptance is void and there is no need for the revocation of offer made by the
defendant.
“
- The plaintiff failed to fulfilled the conditions stated as below:
(i) plaintiff failed to send one of the two documents required that is, the undertaking
letter to the defendant before 18 April 2013. 

(ii) plaintiff had unilaterally amended the option money payable from RM208,827 as
stated in the option to RM237,977.04 without the prior consent of the defendant.
This constitutes a new term which is different from the terms agreed to earlier
irrespective of whether the defendant suffered no detriment with the change.

.
“
By Plaintiff’s conduct failed to fulfill the conditions before 18 April, therefore, the judge
on behalf of the respondent ruled that the contract is lapse and dismissed the case.