论文代写价格：法律合同案例分析
论文代写价格：法律合同案例分析
成龙以2万美元的价格把他的车卖给了大卫。大卫喜欢陈的提议;不过，他在要约发出时并未表示接受。因此，成龙和大卫之间并没有形成具有法律约束力的合同。根据这一模型，订立法律合同时最基本的要素是对价、要约和接受、订立法律条款的意向和条款的确定性。缺少任何要素都不能形成具有约束力的合同。在大卫和陈的案例中，大卫没有表现出接受。因此，合同在双方之间没有得到执行。除此之外，在给定的场景中也提到David在一段时间之后接受了Chan的offer;尽管如此，双方之间的法律合同仍然没有形成。这是因为一方的报价由于时间的推移而终止。拉姆斯盖特维多利亚酒店(Ramsgate Victoria Hotel)与蒙特福尔酒店(Montefoire)的案例就是最好的例子，说明由于时间的推移，法律合同不具有约束力。此外，David已经通过电子邮件向Chan的offer发出了他的录取通知书。成龙也没有对大卫的接受做出任何反应，并把车卖给了第三方。
论文代写价格：法律合同案例分析
考虑到邮政接受的原则，凡以电邮、传真或电话方式发出的要约，概不接受。Holwell Securities Vs . Hughes的例子最适合理解考虑邮政承兑规则的有约束力合同的有效要约和承兑。对某一特定要约的接受，必须以书面或口头方式表示。考虑受要约人的思想、主意或者意见的承诺，不构成具有法律约束力的合同。同样，对某一特定报价保持沉默也不会使双方签订具有法律约束力的合同。这可以从Felthouse与Bindley的例子中更好地理解。简而言之，它的结论是，陈振聪和大卫之间没有形成任何具有法律约束力的合同。考虑到上述情况，TT公司与Cammy Pty公司之间不存在具有约束力的合同。有限公司因为对于一个具有法律约束力的合同来说，接受要约而不附加任何条件是至关重要的。因此，Cammy Pty Ltd将不会成功地对TT co.的违约行为。此外，如果一方向另一方提出报价，而后者通过附加一些条件来接受，那么就会发生还盘，没有形成合同。
论文代写价格：法律合同案例分析
Chan offers his car to David for a price of $20,000. David likes the offer made by Chan; however, he has not shown any acceptance at the time the offer has made. Hence, no legal binding contract has formed between Chan and David. As per this model, the elements that are essential at the time of making a legal contract are consideration, offer and acceptance, intention to create legal terms and certainty of terms. Absence of any of the elements will not result in a binding contract. In case of David and Chan, David has not shown acceptance. Consequently, the contract has not enforced between the two parties. Besides this, it has also mentioned in the given scenario that David has accepted Chan’s offer after sometime; nonetheless, a legal contract between the two parties has still not formed. It is because the offer made by one party terminates due to lapse of time. The best example for non-binding of a legal contract due to lapse of time has observed from the case of Ramsgate Victoria Hotel Vs Montefoire.Furthermore, David has sent his acceptance to Chan’s offer after sometime through email. Chan has also not shown any reaction towards David’s acceptance and sold car to some third party.
论文代写价格：法律合同案例分析
Considering the rule of postal acceptance, offer will not be accepted if it has made through email, fax or made on the telephone. Example of Holwell Securities Vs Hughes is best to understand valid offer and acceptance for a binding contract considering postal acceptance rule. Acceptance to a particular offer can only be made if the acceptance is expressed in words either written or oral. Acceptance by considering offeree’s thoughts, ideas or opinions will not result in a legal binding contract. Similarly, silence towards a particular offer will also not make a legal and binding contract between two parties. This can better understand from example of Felthouse Vs Bindley. In short, it has concluded that no legal binding contract has formed between Chan and David.Considering the given scenario, there is no binding contract formed between TT co. and Cammy Pty. Ltd. It is because for a legal binding contract it is essential that the offer must be accepted without imposing any kind of conditions. Thus, Cammy Pty Ltd will not succeed in their actions against TT co. for breach of contract. In addition, if one party makes an offer to second party and the latter accepts it by imposing some conditions then counter offer occur and no contract has formed.
