Why choose us?

We understand the dilemma that you are currently in of whether or not to place your trust on us. Allow us to show you how we can offer you the best and cheap essay writing service and essay review service.

Law of Commerce

Law of Commerce

Gibson comes to you, his lawyer, asking you to explain the legal positions of all the parties. how

would you respond?

From the above case, it is evident from the beginning that there was a clear manifestation
by both parties to enter into a contract. Despite the offer being brought into the table, the law
allows for the revocation of the offer at any time before the offer is accepted and such revocation
must be communicated. In this case, Campbell revoked the offer made to Gibson after getting a
good deal from another client. However, the revocation never reached his client in good time due

LAW OF COMMERCE 2
to postal delays. According to Tepper (2011), revocation of the offer only becomes effective
when the notice is received, to imply that Gibson was right to accept the offer since he was yet to
receive the revocation letter. An offer is irrevocable after the acceptance and an offer is also
irrevocable if the offeree has commenced to perform acts that constitutes acceptance. In this
case, Campbell had already revoked the offer to Gibson since he found a better deal elsewhere.
Therefore, Campbell is not justified to force Gibson into buying his property since his letter of
revocation was finally received by Gibson. In this regard, there is no offer and acceptance
between these two parties since Campbell rejected Gibson’s offer and Gibson also changed his
mind after realizing that he is not financially prepared. Therefore, Campbell has no legal reasons
to sue Gibson for breach of contract since he contributed to the contract to being successful. On
the other hand, Gibson is free from this contractual agreement since he received the revocation
letter from Campbell that erased their contract. Despite Campbell commencing performance
regarding the offer, he has no legal claim for this since he does this after rejecting the offer
between him and Gibson. Therefore, Campbell has no legal reasons to due Gibson and Gibson
has no liability for the breach of contract.

Reference

Tepper, P. (2011). The Law of Contracts and the Uniform Commercial Code. Cengage Learning;
2 edition

LAW OF COMMERCE

All Rights Reserved, scholarpapers.com
Disclaimer: You will use the product (paper) for legal purposes only and you are not authorized to plagiarize. In addition, neither our website nor any of its affiliates and/or partners shall be liable for any unethical, inappropriate, illegal, or otherwise wrongful use of the Products and/or other written material received from the Website. This includes plagiarism, lawsuits, poor grading, expulsion, academic probation, loss of scholarships / awards / grants/ prizes / titles / positions, failure, suspension, or any other disciplinary or legal actions. Purchasers of Products from the Website are solely responsible for any and all disciplinary actions arising from the improper, unethical, and/or illegal use of such Products.