Rule: An offer is said to be valid if the offer is clear, definite, explicit, and communicated to another person or offeree. According to Australian Woollen Mills Pty Ltd v The Commonwealth (1954) 93 CLR 546, an offer is an expressed form of willingness by one person to enter into a legal relationship with another person, when accepted. Offer can be verbal or written as held in the case of Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co [1893] 1 QB 256.
Application: In the given scenario, the NT government has offered employment to Charlie based on his qualifications and experience which would be as per the employment agreement. The offer is communicated and the willingness to hire Charlie is also expressed. Moreover, the offer is made in writing in the form of an e-contract.
Conclusion: Therefore, as per Australian Woollen Mills Pty Ltd v The Commonwealth (1954) 93 CLR 546 and Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co [1893] 1 QB 256 it is a valid offer.
Rule: Acceptance is also referred to as agreeing on one thing. It is followed by an offer and the essential element of the acceptance is that it must be communicated to the offeror. The acceptance can be made through mail as per the Electronic Transactions Act 1999(Cth). As held in the case of Entores v Miles Far East Corporation Pty Ltd [1955] 2 QB 327 at 333, the acceptance is said to be communicated if it is sent by mail by the offeree and therefore, the offeror is then bound by the acceptance irrespective of the fact that acceptance is not received due to the fault of offeror.
Application: In the given case, the NT government has made an offer to Charlie. Charlie has accepted the offer and communicated the same through mail. Acceptance is marked if Charlie signed the document and properly communicated it to the offeror. In this case, Charlie has signed the document and mailed it back to NT government human resources. This means it has been validly communicated to the offeror (Brogden Vs Metropolitan Railway Co. (1877) ).
Conclusion: Based on the facts above, Charlie has legally made acceptance of the offer, offered by the NT government. If mail has reached to SPAM folder and has not been looked then it is the fault of the offeror, not the offeree.
Rule: An offer is said to be made when a person asks another person to do something or abstain from doing something. Boulton vs. Jones 1857 States that if an offer is made to a specific person, it is called a specific offer. When an acceptance to an offer is done within the time limit provided in the offer and communicated validly to the offeror on time. As held in Ramsgate Victoria Hotel vs. Montefiore (1866) LR 1 Ex 109 , if the time given is lapsed, the offer may be revoked. However, in this case, communication is made for a valid acceptance through a valid mode within a given time limit, it is not revocable by the offeror.
Application: In this case, Charlie has communicated the acceptance within the time limit and in a valid way therefore, acceptance is valid and time has also not elapsed. So, the Director is bound to accept the offer. According to Entores v Miles Far East Corporation Pty Ltd [1955] 2 QB 327 at 333, it is the fault of the offeror, that the mail has reached the SPAM folder.
Conclusion: Hence, the director cannot revoke the offer.
Rule: Consideration has been defined in the case law Misa vs Curries (1875) LR 10 Ex 153 as consideration may consist of either some right, interest, profit, benefits accruing to promisor or loss, or responsibility given or undertaken by promise. Consideration may be an offering to do something or abstain from doing something.
Application: In this case, Bitcoin is a form of consideration offered to Charlie for employment opportunities by the NT government. Bitcoin is in the form of digital currency where transaction verification is done using blockchain technology and cryptography. Charlie may in the future sell such digital currency and get physical cash.
Conclusion: Here, bitcoin may be considered a valid offer by the NT government to Charlie.
Rule: A non-competing clause may be added to a contract and is considered as reasonable if it is formed to prevent the interest of the business. In the case of Austal Ships vs. Clay [2018] WASC 178 , the Supreme Court held that the employer restricting the employee by the non-competing clause is valid because otherwise, the employee would have worked for the employer's direct competitor.
Application: In this case, the NT government has offered Charlie work on employment provided that he will abstain from entering employment elsewhere during the duration of employment and for one year after the conclusion of their employment. This clause may be considered a valid clause because it is added by the employer to prevent his interest in business and it is duly accepted by Charlie.
Conclusion: Hence, considering the facts above, it may be concluded that refusing to work for another employer is valid.
Rule: The elements of a collateral contract as held in the case of De Lassalle v Guildford [1901] All ER 495 that the collateral contract must not be inconsistent with the main contract and it should be promissory and it should also possess the characteristic of a valid contract.
Application: In this case, Charlie has been offered a contract of employment where consideration has been fixed to have been in Bitcoin. The salary would be double what has been presently for Charlie. There was a promise to pay double the amount of the starting salary, however, the amount of the consideration was not fixed. Therefore, the collateral contract of double start salary does not fulfill the basic elements of the contract i.e., consideration.
Conclusion: Based on the facts above, offering double salary is terms in the same contract of employment so offered, without fixing the amount of consideration is inconsistent, therefore, it is not a collateral contract.
You Might Also Like:
Assignment of The Week – Contract Law
LAW6000 Business and Corporate Law
Turnitin Report
FREE $10.00Non-AI Content Report
FREE $9.00Expert Session
FREE $35.00Topic Selection
FREE $40.00DOI Links
FREE $25.00Unlimited Revision
FREE $75.00Editing/Proofreading
FREE $90.00Bibliography Page
FREE $25.00Bonanza Offer
Get 50% Off *
on your assignment today
Doing your Assignment with our samples is simple, take Expert assistance to ensure HD Grades. Here you Go....
🚨Don't Leave Empty-Handed!🚨
Snag a Sweet 70% OFF on Your Assignments! 📚💡
Grab it while it's hot!🔥
Claim Your DiscountHurry, Offer Expires Soon 🚀🚀