The paper "Business Regulations and Practices" is a worthy example of an assignment on business. For a contract to exist there must be an offer that must be followed with unconditional acceptance. The question, in this regard, is whether there is a valid contract; and whether Ball can hold Sullivan to a contract. In this case, there is an offer that was made by Sullivan to Ball. The offer was unconditionally accepted by Ball when it was put in writing and consequently accepting the offer made by Sullivan. Legally, acceptance gives rise to a binding agreement between the two parties; as such Ball can hold Sullivan to the contract of the sale of the land.
Acceptance can be in writing, oral or implied from conduct. In this case, the acceptance was in writing and that, as well makes it a binding contract between the parties (Elliott et al 3). One of the significant rules of acceptance is that it must be communicated to the ‘ offeror’ , and does not take effect until received by the offeror (person who made it). In this circumstance, Chernek did not receive the acceptance because he died before he had the opportunity to receive the acceptance; hence no contract (Elliott et al 4). The contract fails to mature, the moment the equipment was destroyed by fire.
Due to that frustration (fire), the contract becomes void. Acceptance cannot take place without the existence of the object (equipment) in question. The equipment formed the very reason for the offer which required acceptance. However, the need for acceptance is beaten given that the equipment does not exist after the destruction by fire. Chernek died before the acceptance of the offer by Bollow.
The general rule is that, if the person who made the effort dies before acceptance of the contract, then, it remains terminated. It is evident acceptance was only communicated after the death; hence the contract was terminated. In circumstances where the party to whom the offer was made dies and the representatives agree to continue with the contract, it may be allowed. Similarly, Bollow had, by implication of his conduct ( paying 100 dollars for a thirty day period), showing his commitment; and it follows that he had implied his wish to continue with the contract to the point of making the final acceptance.
Furthermore, his estate made acceptance of the contract within the stipulated time. The rule is that an offer must be accepted within the stipulated time, and that was correctly done by Bollow’ s estate (Elliott et al 6). Revocation From a legal viewpoint, for revocation to take effect, it must be communicated; and becomes effective, only, when received. Whereas acceptance, through the postal rule, becomes effective upon posting, revocation of an offer becomes effective upon receipt.
Given the case, Tanya had not received the revocation letter; she, on the contrary, sent a letter of acceptance. Due to the legal principles underlying, Dennis is not right to claim that he had revoked the contract. The revocation, as required, had not been, reasonably, received by Tanya. Dennis, is there bound by the contract, as claimed by Tanya.