BJS Preparation Series-The Contract Act, 1872(Problem Solving, Topic: Acceptance)


BJS Exam (Preliminary, Written, Viva) Preparation Series

Question: ‘P’ applied for the principalship of a local college and the Governing Body of the college passed a resolution appointing him. The appointment was not formally communicated to him but one of the members privately told him of his selection after the meeting. The resolution was subsequently rescinded. ‘P’ claimed the post of principal. Will ‘P’ succeed? Give reasons in support of your answer and also refer case-law, if any, on the point.

Answer: No, ‘P’ will not succeed in this case-Powell v. Lee, (1908) 24 TLR 606.

Reasons: The facts of this problem is similar to the famous case of Powell v. Lee. In this case the plaintiff applied for the post of headmaster-ship of a school and the Board of Managers of the school passed a resolution selecting him for the post. One of the managers acting in his individual capacity, informed the plaintiff what had occurred in the meeting. In the next meeting the resolution of the previous meeting selecting the plaintiff was rescinded and the plaintiff was not appointed to the post. The court held that there was no authorized communication of his selection and therefore there was no completed contract. The manager who informed the plaintiff of the resolution passed in the meeting of the Board of Managers was not authorised by the Board to communicate the information to the plaintiff. Hence, the communication was unauthorized, and therefore, it was not sufficient to complete the contract.

   Thus, it is clear that for a binding contract the acceptance must be communicated by the offeree or his authorised agent. Communication of acceptance by an unauthorised person does not create a binding contract.

   In the given problem ‘P’ was informed about his appointment or the post of principalship by a member in private capacity and not communicated by Governing Body of the college or its authorised agent in official capacity. Thus, the communication is unauthorised and does not create a binding contract and ‘P’ will not succeed if he claims the post of principalship on the basis of communication made by an unauthorised member of Governing Body in its private capacity.

Author's blogspot address link:

https://judicialmagistratenazmulhasan.blogspot.com/

Author's academia address link:

https://independent.academia.edu/NazmulHasan222

 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

17th BJS Viva Preparation by Judge Nazmul Hasan.

100 Legal Maxims for 18th BJS Exam and Law Students.

BJS প্রিলিমিনারি পরীক্ষায় সফল হওয়ার টিপস: প্রত্যেক পরীক্ষার্থীর জন্য গুরুত্বপূর্ণ পরামর্শ