Analysis Of Re Ratt's Acceptance Letter

1710 Words4 Pages

Re Ratt’s Acceptance Letter The letter sent by Ratt on the 21/01/15 is the acceptance of the offer sent by Jonas on the 15/01/15. This letter follows the ‘postal rule’, that acceptance occurs immediately when the letter is sent, which is 9am on the 21/05/15. Ratt could argue that Jonas may have contemplated that acceptance would be through post, as it was not stated through which method Ratt should accept the offer, and that Jonas’ offer was also sent through post. Ratt may argue this fell within the option deadline, as the offer did not state the start date of the option, and Ratt believed it was open until the 17/01/15, when he received the letter. Jonas could argue that the option had begun on the 16/01/15, the day after he sent the letter. He could argue this as he had emailed Ratt early on 21/01/15 to revoke …show more content…

However, he still would likely be held liable in damages for revocation after part-performance, and thus we would advise him to pay the damages that Celine is claiming from him. This would still leave Celine satisfied as she is not claiming for the contract to be enforced and to receive the job offered, instead she is making a claim for the costs lost. Re Consideration Celine would likely argue that the offer would satisfy the benefit/detriment requirement or consideration, as the detriment was to move to Melbourne, and this would be a benefit on the promisor, as it would allow Jonas to set up the child-care centre. This would be a quid pro quo, as the detriment of moving to Melbourne would confer a benefit on Celine of having the job, thus satisfying the bargain requirement. Jonas would be unlikely to debate this element. Re

More about Analysis Of Re Ratt's Acceptance Letter

Open Document