Question

Kamalpreet and Disha are sisters. On 1st February, Kamalpreet meets her sister for a drink

and tells her she is looking for a new sports car. Disha replies that she wants to sell her

red Ferrari as there is now a better model available and that she is happy to sell it to her

sister ‘on a business basis’. Disha says she wants about $100,000 for it. That evening,

Kamalpreet sends an email to Disha saying, ‘I accept your offer to sell the car for

$100,000 and will transfer the money in a few days.’ On 3rd February, Disha sends

Kamalpreet an email that says: ‘Don't be stupid I wouldn’t sell the car for that; I want

$125,000 for it. To avoid any further misunderstanding, do not email me again unless you

do not want the car at this price.’ Kamalpreet, was so annoyed on reading the first sentence

of Disha’s email that she deleted it without reading further and did not reply. Three weeks

later Disha rang Kamalpreet and demanded $125,000, offering to deliver the car.

Required:

a. Advise Kamalpreet on your legal opinion

b. How, if at all, would your answer differ if upon reading Disha’s email on 3rd

February, Kamalpreet decided to purchase the car for $125,000 and Disha now refuses

to deliver it?

Answer 1

a. In this case, considering that there hasn't been any official or legal written contract between the concerned parties regarding the commercial exchange of the Ferrari car, the initial verbal communication or interaction between Disha and Kamalpreet can be regarded as an initial agreement regarding the car sale including the relevant or associated terms and conditions that have been discussed between them. Therefore, based on the initial verbal consensual agreement between Kamalpreet and Disha, it was decided and confirmed that the concerned car would be sold for $100,000 which is the price offered or proposed by Disha or the seller. Further, it should be noted that as a seller she did not hint at or clearly specify about any possible modification of the proposed or offered price for the car later on under any circumstances, which essentially construes that according to the terms and conditions of the initial agreement between the buyer and seller, the final selling price of the car has been officially set at $100,000. Kamalpreet has also sent an official email acknowledging the concerned terms and conditions of the verbal agreement and expressed her official consent and acceptance of the initial agreement. Hence, any subsequent and arbitrary modification of the pre-decided selling price of the car would legally constitute a contractual breach in this instance and from a legal standpoint, Kamalpreet is not liable or obligated to abide by any subsequent change/s to the erstwhile terms and conditions as agreed upon and officially confirmed(twice by the buyer or Kamlpreet) by both buyer and seller in the first place.

b. As stated in part-a. the sudden and random change in the price change of the concerned car by the seller or Disha, in this case, represents a violation of the erstwhile agreement or contractual terms between the buyer and seller from a legal perspective. To implement any subsequent modification of the selling price of the car, Disha or the seller should have clearly specified the potential or possible change in the initial offered price of the car along with the particular conditions or circumstances under which such price change would be officially effective. However, in her email reply to Kamalpreet on 3rd February, Disha has indicated that if Kamalpreet is interested to buy the car for $125,000 then she would be apparently willing to sell it to her. Now, considering the hypothetical possibility that Kamalpreet is willing to buy the car from Disha for $125,000 and even then Disha refuses to deliver it to her, then Kamalpreet can legally point out or argue that it would be a further contractual breach or violation on behalf of Disha or the seller as the buyer has officially agreed to buy the car for the modified price of $125,000 as officially re-offered by the seller or Disha and it is a complete and utter legal contravention on the seller's side to refuse to deliver the car. Therefore, based on the second official confirmation and agreement between Kamlpreet and Disha, Disha is clearly liable or obligated to sell the car to Kamalpreet as again, anything otherwise has not been officially specified by her when she re-offered to sell the car for $125,000. Therefore, Kamalpreet can perhaps undertake further legal disciplinary action against the seller or Disha, in this case, on grounds of official contractual violation or breach.