Sample answer with IRAC PDF

Preview

Summary

contract law how to use IRAC approach...

Description

ISSUE RULE APPLICATION CONCLUSION The issue is whether Kim has a binding agreement with the retailer to buy the camera for £46. Agreement is made up of an offer and a corresponding acceptance (Gibson v MCC). The court applies an objective test to agreement (Storer v MCC). It considers whether the reasonable person would consider that there is an agreement based on what was said and done between the parties. However, the offeree will not be able to enforce an agreement where the offeree knew or ought reasonably to have known that the offeror was mistaken as to the terms of their offer (Chwee Kin Keung v Digilandmall). Here Kim was aware that the price was very low because she had seen it in other shops. The retailer will argue that she was aware of their mistake as to the price because there was such a significant price difference and was trying to take advantage of the situation or at the least that she ought to have known of their mistake. However, Kim may argue that even if she did have suspicions over the price these were allayed when she checked the price with the sales assistant. As a result, whether Kim has an enforceable agreement will depend on whether the court believes she knew or ought reasonably to have known that there was a mistake as to price. Unless there were signs highlighting a very significant intended promotion it is likely they will decide that there is no enforceable agreement....