Business Law 280
J&P International Enterprise, Inc. v Cancer Treatment Services International
Ithe case of J&P International Enterprise, Inc. v Cancer Treatment Services International (CTSI) there are a number of issues that need to be addressed. First of all, there is the issue of whether an offer was made on October, 25, 2007 by J&P to CTSI or is it merely a pre-negociation. After that has been establised as either an offer or a negociation, it is important to analyze the next step of this case, which is entirely composed of Nicholas' response. The issues needed to be addressed in Nicholas' response are core to this case. The first thing needed to be done is draw a clear line ...view middle of the document...
First of all assuming the previous statement to be correct, we can easily assume that Nicholas' is indeed a counteroffer. A counter offer can have roughly three outcomes. By definition, a counteroffer is a counterproposal of the orriginal offer from the offeree that terminates the previous offer, and acts as a new offer, thus switching the offeree with the offeror; so, the moment the counteroffer is received and accepted a new contract is born. A counteroffer does not always imply the termination of the first offer if the offeree does not show sufficient unwillingness to reject the original offer. The last form of a counteroffer is called conditional acceptance. This is very similar to a normal counteroffer, the only difference being that it doesn't necessarely change the terms of the contract. This type of counteroffer, as the name suggests, merely imposes conditions that the offeree feels necessary.
For the third step we need to determine the type of contract that it is formed between the two parties following the counteroffer and the detriments or benefits that they incur, if any. A legal detriment implies an act or forbearence on the part of the offeree, that before the formation of the contract was not his legal obligation. The offeror, or promisor, on the other hand will generally receive a legal benefit, which was not his legal right. A unilateral contract is briefly defined as a promise in exchange for an act where the offeror receives a legal benefit and the offeror incurs a legal detriment. A bilateral contract is defined as an exchange of promises between the two parties where they both incur a legal detriment and benefit resulting from the mutuality of obligation of both parties. Finally, we have to determine the legality of the modifications of the assumed contract, if any. Under Common Law, a preexisting contract to be modified, both parties must show mutual consideration if they want the contract to be enforceable.
By sending the proposal entitled "Agreement of Consultant Services between Cancer Treatment Services International and J&P International Enterprise, Inc." , that included signature lines, it is safe to assume that J&P thought it over and the subject matter of the proposal was clearly defined. The fact that CTSI took it seriously and proceeded to respond to it we can safely assume even further that the content of the proposal was legitimate. This action also shows clear intent on the part of J&P to get into a binding contract with CTSI. Lastly, it was communicated in a proper manner and the offeree clearly received the message and considered it. Given all these facts, it is safe to assume that the act of sending the written proposal to CTSI was indeed an offer made by J&P.
Nicholas' response to the letter is, by all means, a counteroffer. This particular counteroffer can safely be regarded as a entirely new offer since Nicholas' clearly shows unwilingness to accept the original offer. This is not a matter of...
