Contract Law 2014-2015 Assesment problem with case history I will Essay

Contract Law 2014-2015 Assesment problem with case history I will supply case history as a word document - Essay Example The common law has 3 basic fundamentals in making of a contract namely agreement, contractual intention and consideration. Agreement as an essential of the basic law means that the parties ought to come to a legal agreement. Basically, an agreement can only be met when one party presents an offer, when this offer gets accepted by the other party, it becomes an agreement. The courts apply an objective test to determine whether the parties have arrived at an agreement. In the case study, when Brian decides to purchase the phone at EverEager, he and the company come to an agreement that he would pay a once-a-month payment direct deduction of  £35 for a period of one year1. In contract law, an offer is the willingness of a party on a contact on the specific terms. The offer is made with the objective that it should serve as the binding role once it gets accepted by the individual to whom it’s addressed. An offer can be directed to a single person or to a specific group of individuals. The Brian vs. EverEager is based on a single person. An offer is usually made by either words or by conduct. In the case study, Brian is handed the document by the assistant of the mobile phone company EverEager, he goes through it and signs. This offer is done by written words. An acceptance refers to the final and absolute expression of agreement to the terms and conditions of the offer. In this case there ought to be an objective expression, by the receiver of the offer, of a will to be bound by the terms. Acceptance of an offer has no lawful effect unless it gets communicated to the offerer. The general rule of contract law is that a postal appearance is effective only when the letter of acceptance gets accepted. If acceptance takes place through an immediate medium such as email, it will effective at the period and place of receipt. It is also vital to note that an offerer cannot instruct that the offerers silence aggregates