The principle or issue of law

 The legal concern is whether the agreement met by the two parties can be evaluated as a valid contract.

Explain the rule(s) of law

 There are three necessities for the formation of a legally accepted contract; the intention of making the contract, the consideration made to undertake the contract and the agreement- functional transaction reached after a consultation, made between the parties involved.

The most significant part of a contract is the agreement thus; if an agreement is not reached or is left incomplete then the law cannot enforce it.  

 The validity of an agreement is reached or determined when parties have agreed all the things concerning the agreement such as the terms of agreement.  In case the items being traded are services or goods then both parties are legally allowed to buy and sell the items. For example, in sales contact, the terms of the agreement is that the items must be identified when the agreement is made and when the sale deals with a service then the eligibility of the service provider is established before the contract is made.  An agreement in a sales contract must display: the quantity, the price of the item and the point of sale.  

 In order to arrive to an agreement then an analysis of the acceptance of commitment of trade and readiness to offer the service or product should be determined. This can be done through a complex or long negotiations. A business offer has to be complete for it to be considered as a reliable offer to be contracted. An offer is also dependable on a certain agreed time that if the time elapses then it is considered an expired offer.  For an offer to be complete then the buyer has to make an acceptance either verbally or in written.

 In Clare v Excel Equip Pty Ltd (2002) 2 All ER 421 Excel Equip Pty Ltd advertised over the media about the varieties of diamond jewels. The buyer in this case was Clare and the seller was Excel Equip Pty Ltd. The parties has already made an agreement and sealed the contract. They had agreed that the buyer was going to collect the item after making the last deposit which she has already made a deposit-half the amount (Full amount-$700). The seller later found a better deal and had to sell the piece to another client who offered $1200 in cash. However, the Australian court found this to be a bridge of contract.

The court thought that the offer and the commitment were not complete. The contract terms and conditions between the parties were broken. The client was ready to buy the item after making a commitment of paying half the price and sure to take the offer after 3 days. Thus, the court established that Excel Equip Pty Ltd bridged the contract hence was to compensate the client a commitment as well offer another sale of the same product if the client was still interested. In addition, Excel Equip Pty Ltd was fined $300 dollars for bridge of legally accepted contract.

 In the case of Stephen v Julia, Julia had reached to an agreement with Stephen on the sale of the item but the deal was not reached since it was pending the acceptance of Stephen. Later Stephen accepted the offer and made left Julia a message indicating that he was ready to take the offer at $200, but Julia found another client Samantha who was ready to take the item in cash. She completed the sell of the commodity.  The question is did Julia’s deal legally accepted and was the contract complete between her and Stephen to mandate the sell?

 Apply the law to the fact

 The agreement between Julia and Stephen was not agreed between the two parties. In addition, they had not enforced the agreement since it was pending Stephen’s commitment.  The question is was there offer and commitment as well acceptance.  For this case the late commitment and acceptance of the offer by Stephen was a legitimate procedure but the two had stipulated the expire time frame of the contract.  According to the terms and conditions of sale of Julia she had not come to an agreement that Stephen was the only legitimate buyer of the item and the item was to wait for his conformation on the offer.

 Draw possible conclusions

 The agreement for the formation of the contract could not be established since both parties had not agreed to completion on the terms of contract. Thus, the contract is termed as an open contract whereby, the seller and the buyer had the right to drop the offer or the acceptance at any time. Therefore, the contract in this case was not valid. 

 Question 2

 Identify the principle or issue of law

The terms of agreement and the conditions of a contract is what are granted by the principle of law.  The issue raised in this case is whether Paul’s