Fast response plz....

[Jasleen]

Here goes the quetion......
Xenon retails telecommunication appliances. In order to launch a new product, he advertised a Grand Summer sale in a local newspaper as follows:
Grand Summer Sale: Super Sellphones at Giveaway prices. To be sold only at $50 to the first 10 customers who reply enclosing a cheque for $50.

The day after the advertisement had been published, Yoyo posted a letter to Xenon, enclosing $50 in cash.  Yoyo was one of the first 10 customers to respond to the advertisement. Meanwhile, Xenon had discovered that he was unable to obtain ten of the Super Sellphones because of a fire at his supplier's warehouse. Accordingly Xenon published a further advertisement in the same newspaper for the following day announcing that the Grand Summer Sale was cancelled and that the special offer on Super Sellphones was no longer available. Two days later, Yoyo's letter that had been delayed in the post, was delivered at Xenon's address. Xenon now refuses to supply Yoyo with a Super Sellphone.

Now me as the plaintiff (Yoyo) need to fight on this case and win it. I am asked to use the contract law to win this case.Please help me. I need some response fast.Thank You

[Lolo]

hi there.  the general rule concerning revocation is that the offer must be rescinded and the revocation must reach the offeree before the offer is accepted.  Furthermore, since the cheque was placed in the mail by your client before the revoction of the offer appeared in the newspaper, on the strength of the 'postal rule,' your client accepted the offer.  Once an offer is accepted it cannot, legally, be rescinded.  Your client will prevail on the basis that the offer was not revoked before acceptance (as acceptance took place when the letter and cheque were mailed.) (i hope you client has proof that (s)he mailed the letter on that day, however.)  Hope this helps, although i am assuming i am about 2 months too late.

[dogtown]

There are two good arguments against your client.

1.  There was never an offer.  While this may not qualify as an advetisement, I dont think it meets the conditions of being an offer.  An offer must be clear and specific as to the terms, and directed at a particular party, this party being the only group who can accept.  The problem is that the offer is not specific enough.  Which phones, exactly are being sold?  What model?  The other conditions are met, however, and my argument here is a weak one.  

2.  The fire discharges the stores duty to perform, if indeed there was a contract.  This is the doctrine of impracticability.  If an unforseeable event (such as fire, flood, etc..) makes performance impracticable, the duty to perform is discharged.