Investorplus Case Study

Issue: The issue is whether Joe and InvestorPlus have a contract and if there's an offer or agreement. An agreement has two main sections; offer and agreement. An offer is the willingness to enter a contract with a person that the offer is directed to, with the terms stated within. The agreement is the negotiated understanding between two or more parties.

Rule:

1. An offer is not effective until it is brought to the notice of the party to whom it is directed. An Advertisement will be regarded as an offer rather than a invitation to treat if it is proven there was an intention to be legally bound.  (Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co)
2. Acceptance in the case of unilateral agreements generally takes the form of performing an act. The offer may not be revoked once performance has begun but before it is completed. ( Daulia Ltd v Four Millbank )
3. In order to amount to an offer it must be shown that the offeror had the intention to be bound. If an Advertisement indicates that they were willing to pay a guarantee they are showing intention to be bound : (Harvey v Facey )
4. Must be made in reliance on the offer. This mean the acceptance be made in the accordance to the terms of the agreement. The agreement happens as soon as the acceptance takes place. The offer must be in their mind at the time of acceptance. ( Hyde v Wrench )

Apply: Apply the scenario if the rules

1. As the advertisement was an offer to the whole word as published in a magazine, it was an offer rather than a invitation to treat. As InvestorPlus intended to be legally bound by the promise, as it had a $5000 guarantee.  As a result of it having this guarantee Joe purchased it on this basis, He then followed the instructions and still lost money. Thus in this case the offer was the advertisement
2. The offer was accepted by Joe, in a Unilateral agreement with InvestorPlus. By Joe purchasing the product, he is taking on their agreement and the guarantee. InvestorPlus is unable to revoke the offer, as it has not only been accepted, but has begun and been acted on.
3. InvestorPlus by making an offer through a magazine is pushing an offer to the world. With a reward, or guarantee of $5000 in this case, InvestorPlus automatically is showing intention to be legally bound by this offer they are publishing. Anyone including Joe who accepts this over is purchasing it on the basis of this money at the end of 6 months. This proves that InvestorPlus has the intention to be bound by this contract.
4.  Joe had accepted the offer after seeing the advertisement, this means it was readily on his mind at the time of acceptance in the hoping if it did not work that he would be rewarded with $5000. The agreement is taking place as soon as Joe bought the product as that is his acceptance.

Conclusion:

As InvestorPlus was intending to be legally bound by this contract Joe does have legally rights.  His rights are only reinforced by the unilateral agreement that means as joe has purchased the product that is him accepting the agreement and InvestorPlus is unable to revoke the contract as begun. The contract is also proven to not be an invitation to treat as it was published in a magazine with a promise of money. With the guarantee of money joe was accepting the offer with this readily on his mind, therefore making the agreement of the offer secure when he purchased the product. With these points taken in consideration, InvestorPlus is unable to terminate the contract under the circumstances, therefore meaning Joe does have legally rights to this guarantee of $5000

...