Contract law requires proof that the offeree intended

Reference no: EM13691059

1. An acceptance will create a contract. At common law, the acceptance had to be identical (mirror image) to the offer. A response that was not identical would amount to a counter-offer and cancel out the offer. Modernly, this is no longer the case. If the offeree gives a grumbling response, or if the response given contains additional terms that are unimportant (immaterial), it will still be ruled an acceptance! The UCC reflects a greater departure from the traditional common law approach. When merchants (pros) are transacting business, they almost always rely on their own forms. An offer will be made on one form and an acceptance will be presented on another form. The purported acceptance will invariably contain terms and conditions that are not in the offer. Will the additional terms cause the court to rule that a counter offer was made? Will a court find a contract based on the terms that are identical and then disregard the additional terms? Will a court find a contract and include the additional terms? Submit your answer.

2. Contract law requires proof that the offeree 'intended' to accept the offer. It is not an uncommon defense for the offeree to allege that she did not intend to accept the offer. The offeree might argue that she didn't even know that an offer was being made, or that when signing the document she failed to read all of the terms, or that she did read all of the terms but did not understand certain ones. How would an offeror prove that the offeree did intend to accept a particular offer if the offeree contended that she was only joking, or that she didn't know that an offer was being made, or that she knew she was signing an offer but she didn't read all of the terms or didn't understand some or all of the terms and conditions?

Reference no: EM13691059

Questions Cloud

Why does this situation violate transitivity : A consumer likes sugar in her coffe, but she simply cannot taste the difference between a cup of coffee with n grams of sugar in it and a cup of coffee with n+1 grams. Suppose a teaspoon of sugar is 6 grams, and suppose she takes her coffee with one ..

Firm is maximizing output for given level of production cost : A firm is maximizing output for a given level of production costs when:

Experiencing constant returns to scale increases : A company experiencing constant returns to scale increases its labor input form 50-75 units and its capital input from 20-30 units. Its output will go up from?

Equationons total revenue and marginal revenue equations : Determine each equationons total revenue and marginal revenue equations. Plot the demand equation and the marginal and total revenue equations on a graph.

Contract law requires proof that the offeree intended : An acceptance will create a contract. At common law, the acceptance had to be identical (mirror image) to the offer. A response that was not identical would amount to a counter-offer and cancel out the offer. Modernly, this is no longer the case. If ..

Elasticity of demand equals : The San Francisco Giants want to boost revenues from ticket sales next season. You are hired as an economic consultant and asked to advise the Giants whether to raise or lower ticket prices next year.

Price of horseradish to croplands domestic price : By comparing the world price of horseradish to Cropland’s domestic price of horseradish, we can determine whether Cropland

Tax is most likely to increase tax revenue in a market : A decrease in the size of a tax is most likely to increase tax revenue in a market with

The deadweight loss from the tax : If the tax on a good is increased from $0.15 per unit to $0.60 per unit, the deadweight loss from the tax

User Account

All Pages