PVL3702 - Contract Formation and Direct Reliance Theory Assigment

Assignment Task

Important Information

You must note that the timeous submission of Assignment 01 will grant you admission for the PVL3702 examination. You must further note that you will be required to submit two (2) assignments for this module, however, ONLY one of these assignments will be marked and it is only the marked assignment that will contribute towards your semester mark. It is only after the due dates for the submission of both assignments have expired, will all students be informed whether assignment 01 OR assignment 02 will contribute towards the semester mark.

Instruction

It is very important that you understand that you only have 1 attempt to submit assignment 1. The onus is on you to submit the correct assignment, and to submit an assignment that is complete as you only have 1 attempt to submit pvl3702 assignment 1. Serious adverse consequences can apply if a lawyer in practice serves the wrong document to the opposing party in the case, or even if an incomplete/incorrect document or pleading is served or filed in the court file. Therefore, ensure that you submit the CORRECT PVL3702 Assignment 1 as you have 1 attempt to do so.

• It is very important that you type a carefully formulated, grammatically correct answer. You must, as far as possible, use your own words when you answer the assignment. If you merely copy sections of the study guide or textbook, this will constitute plagiarism.

• This assignment must be submitted on myunisa in pdf format (and must not be in “read-only” format and it must not be password protected). If your assignment is submitted (on myunisa) in any other format, it will not be accepted.

• For the first assignment, you are required to read two cases (which are referred to in the next paragraph). Together with the reading of these cases, you must identify and study all the relevant pages in the prescribed textbook to fully answer the assignment question. There could be relevant content in the textbook that is not prescribed for study purposes but may still be relevant for this assignment question. Note that finding and reading the cases is part of showing that you are able to conduct basic research, before you proceed to answer the question. When you read a case as part of your researching exercise, you must identify whether a case is relevant to the facts in the problem-type question, and if so, to what extent. As part of this exercise, you must also consider if a case is not relevant, and if the facts therein are distinguishable to the facts in the question that you are dealing with.

• The two cases that you must read for the first assignment are Kok v Osborne 1993 (4) SA 788 (SE), and Constantia Insurance Co Ltd v Compusource (Pty) Ltd 2005 (4) SA 345 (SCA). You can find these judgments in conventional law libraries, online at the website of the Southern African Legal Information Institute (SAFLII) (www.saflii.org), or as an e-resource on the Unisa Library site. On the Unisa Library site click on “Find e-resources”. Then click on “Subjects” and after that, scroll down the page and click on “Law”. Scroll down to and click on “Jutastat e-Publications (Juta Law Online)” or “LexisNexis (South African Law)”, to find the South African cases that you are looking for. Use any method that works for you to find these cases.

• Importantly, once you find and read the two cases mentioned in the previous paragraph, use these two cases to also identify the relevant section(s) in the prescribed textbook to fully answer the assignment question. Study the relevant section(s) of the textbook. Use these two cases that you read, and the relevant sections of the prescribed textbook to fully answer the assignment question set out below.

Question

Carol, an owner of an exclusive bicycle shop advertised a special limited-edition bicycle for sale, and invited the public to make offers for the bicycle. Jane and Portia were among many people who submitted written offers for the bicycle. Jane’s offer was for R150 000, and Portia’s offer was for R190 000. Although Carol intended to accept Portia’s offer, she erroneously wrote a letter to Jane, wherein she accepted Jane’s offer. Jane believes that an enforceable contract was formed but Carol denies this. Apply the direct reliance theory and advise if a legally binding contract was concluded between Carol and Jane. Discuss fully and refer to case law in your answer. Do not apply the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008.

This PVL3702 - Business Administration has been solved by our PhD Experts at My Uni Paper.