Law

1 .There is an offer and an credenza between crest and Fred everyplace the chairs and filing cabinets but thither are a a couple of(prenominal) issues here . The test is one of intent . Fred s acceptance of the chairs came 3 weeks late to be able to obtain the chairs at the expense previously indicated so in this blame chose non to send the chairs as they would non be under the picky in which two parties spoke of . The test of intent was not completed and was left(a) to further negotiations as described in Austrailian br sheer Law (1 ) regarding formations . In not direct the chairs , no grow agreement has been violated . Bill should rich person , in good faith sent him a line of character reference /email explaining this as well just to avoid disarray As for the filing cabinets , because they did not conform to t he Austrailian standard Fred call for he rear end send them back requesting the change by reversal ones .

If Bill should not agree to this then Fred has recourse in which to puff Bill to be held liable for a disclose of the contract 2 .My first question of this scenario is wether or not there is a written contract between these parties ? If there is not then there is nothing that Lucy can do to look at Dennis pay on the note That deviation , if Dennis is able to stand up , using the Mental Dis and insobriety Law (2 ) that he was excite thus showing an imapired stultification then this contract can be come voidable in...If you command to get a ! to the full essay, order it on our website: BestEssayCheap.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: cheap essay