The question that needs to be answered is weather Stacey can recover the losses from Tom.The relevant area of law is contracts.Note that the former contract which has been conducted during the period between July 2010 and July 2012 is terminated due to the fire so there is no dispute between Stacey and Tom. We just need to focus on the thing which happened after the fire.
In order to succeed in the court, Stacey will have to prove to the court that there is a contract between her and Tom, and Tom has breached the contract.
In order to prove there is a validity contract between her and Tom, Stacy must prove to the court thar the following elements are satisfied on the balance of probabilities:
·That there is an agreement between Stacey and Tom;
·That there is an intention to contract;
·That there is consideration presenting;
·That the parties have legal capacity;
·That the parties have consent;
·That the object of the contract is legality;
·That the form of the contract is suitable.
Considering each of these elements in turn:
Was there an agreement between Stacey and Tom?
To establish that Tom has an agreement with her,Stacey will have to show that there is an’offer’ by one party and an ‘acceptance’ by another.
At first, Tom approached Stacey about entering into a new lease agreement so Tom was the offeror and Stacey was the offeree. Then Stacey made a counter-offer ,which means that Stacey became offeror and Tom became offeree.At last, after a communication about the offer ,Tom accepted the new offer and Stacy recorded the details of the conversation on a note pad. As we known, the acceptance may be made in writing, orally, by a combination of orally and in writing or by conduct.In conclusion, there is an agreement between Stacy and Tom.
Was there an intention to contract?
It is known that the intention about create legal relations can be expressed or implied. In this case, According to the former contract between Tom and Stacey, it is evident that the intention of the agreement is to create legal relations as landlord and tenant.What is more, as we known, there is a strong inference that the parties intended to create legal contractual relations in commercial or business agreements and there is no evidence can show that there is no intention to create contract.
Was consideration present?
Consideration is what each contracting party bargains for and gives in exchange for the return promise or performance of the other party and it must be present in every simple contract.In this case, Stacey promised Tom that she would lease the building to him on the same terms as the former one, which indicate thar there is a consideration presenting. In addition, according to the types of consideration, the consideration in this case is the future consideration, which means that the parties exchange promises, each promise being consideration for the other.Here performance of the agreement remains in the future, yet a contract has been made.
Did the parties to the contract have full contractual capacity?
According to the law, only a normal,sane,sober adult person has full capacity to make a contract---which is usually called ‘capacity to contract’. It is evident that both Tom and Stacey have full contractual capacity.

Did the parties have consent?
There is no doubt that the contract is based on a communication between the parties so both of Tom and Stacy know the genuine