Business Law assignment

John has a valuable antique to be sold and the parties that the he is selling to initially is Monica and then comes Mark. The legal issue that the essay will talk about; is John has any obligation and rights to neither Monica nor Mark and if he does, can he be sued for not selling the antique to one of them. It is deem that neither of them has a contract with John and thus John legally can’t be sued for not selling to either Monica or Mark.
On the 1st of June, John negotiated with Monica with an intention to sell her a valuable antique. This means that John wants to have a legal relationship with Monica and therefore John wants to give the rights and obligation towards Monica. However, since Monica didn’t accept the offer given, this means that there was no agreement and therefore a contract does not exist due to the six elements that are inquired to have a valid contract. In this case, it shows that John is the offeror while Monica is the offeree.
However on the next day which is the 2nd of June, John was approached by Mark with a very attractive offer for the valuable. Opposite to the case of John and Monica, John is now the offeree while Mark is the offeror. This is because of the memorandum that John wants his agent to draw up regarding the sale outlining the terms of the contract. This shows that Mark wants to have a legal relationship with John and this means that he has an intention to give rights and obligations to John. John accepted the offer and as a result, they have an agreement.
The likely outcomes which can be deemed are that John can converse with Monica that he has a better offer and if Monica can outstand the offer, then John maybe can sell the valuable antique to her. This is possible because even though John has made a memorandum of sale with Mark, it doesn’t bind him to a contract as memorandum is a written express intention of the parties to create legal relation but not as a substitute for a contract1 thus there is no contract between John and Mark hence John is not bound to a legal relationship with Mark. John can also terminate the offer to either Monica or Mark as again, both of them does not have a legal relationship with John and he has the right to choose to which ever made the best offer.
Furthermore a condition precedent was made by John when he wants to obtain legal advice concerning any contractual obligations he might have to Monica2 before he can make a contract with John. In the case of Masters v Cameron (1954) 91 CLR 353, the High Court held that the agreement was not in its final form and there was no intention to be immediately bound because it has to be acceptable by Cameron’s Solicitor and that’s what there was no intention.3 These two cases are similar as they were a condition precedent to the formation of contract. Thus to that term, a contract was not yet to be existed and that there's a condition in the contract so meaning until the condition is complete as in after Mark has gotten legal advice only they have a legally binding contract.
According to his legal advice, what he may have to do before entering a contract with John is to revoke his offer with Monica. The Dickinson v Dodds [1876] 2 Ch D 243 is a good example in this case as the promise to keep the offer was not binding because to be a bind contract it must be supported with consideration and because it was not supported by consideration, the promise to keep the offer was voidable.4 It shows that he can still revoke the offer been made to Monica due to courtesy and because a contract also can’t be existed because there was no consideration and there must be a consideration in order for the contract to exist.
If John did not include his statement concerning obtaining legal advice in the memorandum of sale, the differences is that he maybe doesn’t have to revoke his offer with Monica because in the end, there was and still no contract between him and Monica so he is not oblige to be bound