Law Beat - Quiz #2

Learning the Law Series - Part 2

Offer and Acceptance

Our friends Jack and Jill, brother and sister, were thinking of buying a house together. They decided to go house hunting with a friend of theirs, Spike. They came upon an open house. The owner was present and showed Jack, Jill and Spike her 7 bedroom home. (Jack and Jill planned to do a lot of entertaining)

Jill and the owner went into the kitchen to talk about the house. The owner indicated that she would be willing to sell the home for $250,000. Spike overhearing all this thought that this was a bargain so he intervened and said that he would accept such an offer. Jill was quite disturbed by Spike's acceptance since Spike never previously revealed his desire to buy a home and knew quite well that Jack and Jill were the ones who desperately needed a home. Jill quickly told Spike off and asked him to leave. Ashamed of this scolding, Spike left vowing never to speak to Jack and Jill ever again.

Jill continued the conversation with the owner and they agreed that Jill would send the offer to the owner in writing the next morning. The next morning, Jill got into a huge fight with Jack over his friendship with Spike. (If this sounds like a soap opera, bear with me.) To spite Jack, Jill decided to send the written offer to the owner without Jack's name on the offer.

The owner received the offer that was for the full value of her asking price. The owner signed the offer and put the offer in her desk drawer. She forgot to send it back to Jill.

Spike was still interested in buying the house. He approached the owner again, this time with a written offer in hand, in the amount of $350,000. She gladly accepted it in writing right there on the spot.

Jill found out that Spike bought the house. She also found out that the owner had accepted her offer and had left the fully signed offer in her desk drawer. Jill decided to sue the owner for breach of contract.

Now you be the judge:

Will Jill be successful?
(a) Jill will be successful because the owner had accepted Jill's offer before Spike's offer.
(b) Jill will be successful since the original offer made by the owner was to Jill on the day that Jill, Jack and Spike first saw the home.
(c) Spike will be successful because the owner accepted his offer and such acceptance had been communicated to Spike.
(d) Jill will be successful since the judge will clearly see that Spike is a scoundrel and should not be successful in getting something by cutting out his friends.
Could Spike have enforced his original acceptance of the owner's offer to Jill on the day that Jill, Jack and Spike first saw the home?
(a) Spike should be able to enforce the original offer and acceptance because it was an open house and therefore any acceptance for the full price automatically entitles the acceptor to buy the home.
(b) Spike would not be successful because the original offer was made by the owner to Jill and therefore can only be accepted by Jill.
(c) Spike's acceptance was not in writing and therefore not enforceable.
(d) None of the above.
If Jill is successful, can Jack sue Jill to force her to have title to the house in both his and her names?
(a) Jack would not be successful in any such suit because arrangements between related parties are generally not enforceable unless there is evidence that the parties meant their arrangement to be enforceable.
(b) Jack would be successful because he and Jill had agreed and he desperately needed a home.
(c) Jack will be unsuccessful because the original offer was made by the owner to Jill and therefore can only be accepted by Jill.
(d) Jack will be unsuccessful because his and Jill's huge fight was Jack's fault.
(d) What if the owner after accepting the offer in writing, had called Jill and told her that the offer had been accepted and still failed to send the written copy of the acceptance. Would Jill be successful?
(a) Jill would be successful because the owner's acceptance was communicated to Jill before Spike's offer was accepted.
(b) Jill would be successful because a written offer must be accepted by written acceptance and delivery.
(c) Jill's would not be successful because there were no witnesses to the acceptance.
(d) None of the above.

The principles of law presented in these articles are based on Canadian law. However, the information provided by the Fraud Bureau in this Law Beat series is not legal advice nor conveyed in the course of an solicitor/attorney-client relationship, but is intended merely as general information related to common legal issues. Your access to this article is subject to the Terms of Use and Disclaimer. You are not to rely upon this article for the basis of any decision you wish to make. If you have specific legal problem or question, please contract your legal advisor for specific legal advice relating to your question or problem.