Scribd
Upload
10K views5 pages

How To Answer A Problematic Question??? Key Points: Topic + I R A C 1) Topic / Scope of Discussion

Govinda asks whether he can claim the RM500 reward from Harris for returning his lost camera. The key issue is whether the proposal of the reward was communicated to Govinda. The document outlines that for a valid contract to exist based on a proposal, the proposal must be communicated to the party accepting so they are aware of it. In this case, Govinda only learned of the reward the day after returning the camera, so the proposal was not communicated to him at the time. Therefore, the summary concludes that Govinda cannot claim the reward from Harris.

Uploaded by

syahiir syauqii
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
10K views5 pages

How To Answer A Problematic Question??? Key Points: Topic + I R A C 1) Topic / Scope of Discussion

Govinda asks whether he can claim the RM500 reward from Harris for returning his lost camera. The key issue is whether the proposal of the reward was communicated to Govinda. The document outlines that for a valid contract to exist based on a proposal, the proposal must be communicated to the party accepting so they are aware of it. In this case, Govinda only learned of the reward the day after returning the camera, so the proposal was not communicated to him at the time. Therefore, the summary concludes that Govinda cannot claim the reward from Harris.

Uploaded by

syahiir syauqii
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 5

How to Answer a Problematic Question???

Key Points: Topic + I R A C

1) Topic / scope of discussion

2) I: Issue

-Identify the issue(s) in the question

-Narrow it down based on the scope of discussion of area of law that you
have identified.

-Please tackle one issue at a time

Eg:

Whether Minah can take action against Mila for breach of contract?

Whether minor can enter into a valid contract?

Whether a proposal is communicated to the to Mila?

3) R: Rule of Law (define, explanation, elements, section, case law)

-State the (rule of) law that is relevant to the issue.

-If there’s a statute, the provision from the Act (section) must be
mentioned.

-If there’s any relevant case(s), the case (s) should be stated here.

-Never mention names in the discussion of law above and mention them
only in the application & conclusion section.

-Always start answering by stating the general rules/principles.


-If there’s any exceptions/further elaboration mention them after the main
rule has been discussed.

4) A: Application

-Next apply the above law to the facts of the problem (issue).
-As told before never mention names in the discussion of law above and
mention them only in the application & conclusion section.

5) C: Conclusion

-Once the relevant law have been applied to the facts of the problem in
issue, you may now conclude the discussion.

Question:

Harris lost his camera recently. He advertised in the Mempelam Daily, a local
newspaper, a reward of RM500 to anyone who can find and return the camera
to him. Govinda, his neighbour, found the camera. He knew that camera
belonged to Harris, so he returned it to him. Govinda only knew of the reward
the next day after reading the advertisement. Govinda wishes to claim the
RM500 from Harris.

Avise Govinda.

Example of the answer:

Issue:

Whether Govinda may claim RM500 from Harris? Or

Whether proposal is completely communicated to Govinda? Or

Whether there is a communication of proposal?


Rule of Law:

A contract is an agreement between 2 or more parties that is legally binding


between them. The principal legislation for the law of contract is the Contracts
Act 1950. Under the CA 1950, Section 2(h), contract is referred to as ‘an
agreement enforceable by law’

The word proposal in the Contracts Act 1950 basically bears the same meaning
as ‘offer’. Section 2(a) of the CA, a proposal is made ‘when one person
signifies to another his willingness to do or abstain from doing anything,
with a view of obtaining the assent of that other to such act or abstinence’.
Section 2(b) further mentioned that ‘when the person to whom the proposal is
made signifies his assent thereto, the proposal is said to be accepted’.

Upon such acceptance of the application by the person, an agreement between


the parties is created. The proposal become a ‘promise’ & the party making the
proposal is referred to as the ‘promisor’ & the party accepting the proposal, is
known as the ‘promisee’.

An offer or proposal can be made to any particular person or to public at large.


If made to a particular person, only that person may accept the proposal. If it is
made to the general public, then anyone who meets all the terms of the proposal
may accept.

An example is the case of Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. In this case the
defendants company advertised that they would offer 1000 pound to anyone
who still succumbs to influenza after using the company’s medicine according
to the instructions for a fixed period. The plaintiff duly used the product, but
nevertheless contracted influenza. The plaintiff then sued for the money.

Court in this case held that the plaintiff had accepted the offer of the company
made to the whole world at large and is therefore entitled for the money.
Proposals also must be communicated to the other party to the extent that the
party accepting the proposal is aware of the existence of such proposal in the
first place. The fact that the other party has done something, which
coincidentally appears as if he is accepting the proposal without being actually
aware of the proposal does not bring an agreement into being.

An example is the case of R v Clarke. In this case the Western Australian


Government offered a reward for information leading to the arrest and
conviction of persons responsible for the murder of 2 police officers. X and
Clarke were arrested and charged with murders but shortly after, Clarke gave
information, which led to the arrest of another person, Y. X & Y were later
convicted for the offence and Clarke who did not commit the murders claimed
the reward.

Court in this case refused to grant his claim. It failed on the grounds that the
information was given to clear himself from the murder charge & not in reliance
on the offer of reward.

Application:

In this case there is an offer made by Harris when he advertised in Mempelam


Daily, a local newspaper, a reward of RM500 to anyone who can find and return
the camera to him. Harris made a proposal to the public at large so that anyone
who meets the requirement may claim the reward.

Proposal must be communicated to ensure that the party accepting the proposal
is aware of the existence of such proposal. In this case Govinda not aware about
the existence of proposal i.e reward of RM500 made by Harris at the time he
found the camera. Proposal is not communicated to him. He only knew the
reward the next day after reading the advertisement. The situation is similar with
the case of R v Clarke.
Conclusion:

In conclusion, Govinda cannot claim the reward of RM500 from Haris because
the proposal is not communicated to him. He has no knowledge about the
reward at the time he returned the camera to Haris. The fact that the other party
has done something, which coincidentally appears as if he is accepting the
proposal without being actually aware of the proposal does not bring an
agreement into being.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy