bus law assignment 2 (1 Viewer)

[tessa_tallwood]

hey
i was just wonderin if neone that does bus law this semester could help me with the assignment... im a bit confused

in q2. it says that louisa would not proceed with the renovations to the store unless her cousin approved that she could have the rent for half price...

next para it states that he would let her know if she could rent it within a week
the next para it says after speakin wit her cousin she approaches the council and work commences on the store

just wonderin does this mean that the cousin verbally approved that lousia could have the store fore half price??

or

has lousia just gone and begun the renovations with out gainin approval??

ne input would be good thanks

 

[tessa_tallwood]

i sorta get wat u sayin but she goes and speaks to the council one week after speaking with her cousin... so i was thinkin that he did say yes and u just had to assume that .... cuz it said earlier in the question that she would not do ne renovations till he said yes...

i duno if that made ne sense but do u get wat im sayin... like she didnt wana spend the money til he definately said yes... and he said he would tell her one week lata ... and it says one week lata she goes to the council to start the proposal.. so wat i was assumin was that he did say yes and thats y she went to the council...???? thats y i a bit confused

 

[Jonathan A]

A bit late now but silence does not constitue acceptance in Felthouse v Bindley. However, in Empirnal Holdings performance constitutes an acceptance implied (not relevant here). The issue here is that an acceptance must be unequivocal, in this case a conditional acceptance refutes that, so no contract. The third class of Masters v Cameron confirms this, that only the major issues were dealt with and as a result, parties are free to withdraw until a lease is signed.

The remedy for Louisa was Estoppel providing she could prove the six elements under Waltons v Maher.