Part (a)

There are two main issues rose in this case between Sulaiman and the
supermarket supervisor. One of them is whether the display of goods is an offer made
by Jolly Molly Supermarket to sell those goods and whether the fact that Sulaiman
filled up the trolley with goods made him bound to buy these goods.

First Issue
An offer differs from invitation to treat. In Section 2 (a) of the Contracts Act
1950, when one person signifies to another his willingness to do or to abstain from
doing anything, with a view to obtaining the assent of that other to the act or
abstinence, he is said to make a proposal. One reasonable man is willing to offer in
doing an act without force whereas invitation to treat enables negotiation and it is
only inviting to sell or make an offer. Offer and invitation to treat have to be
differentiated when an offer is accepted; the contract will be automatically legally
bound with the relevant parties. However, the invitation to treat will be merely offers
which can lead to no legally formation of contracts in the very end. If the goods on
display were an offer, then taking them off the shelf would constitute an acceptance
by conduct. This is if a person places the goods back on the shelf, he or she would be
in breach of contract
1
. The display of goods is not actually an offer, but an invitation
to treat where sellers are actually invite buyers to make an offer of buying a good and
which sellers can then accept or reject.

The Malaysian Contracts Act 1950 is silent about this term i.e. there is a
lacuna. That is why due to the section 3(1) of the Civil Law Act 1956, English cases
can be used. The case of Fisher v Bell
2
clearly explains why the display of goods is
not an offer. The shopkeeper in this case was not guilty for the offense, which was
charged against him as the display of the knife in the shop was just an invitation to
treat and the shopkeeper had not offered the knife for sale within the section 1(1) of
the Act of 1959. Therefore, in a given situation goods on shelves are just an invitation
for buyers to make an offer. This means taking goods by Sulaiman and putting them

1
TEXTBOOK
2
[1961] 1 QB 394
in the trolley does not show his acceptance of the offer. He is able to freely take any
goods, which will not make him obliged to buy them.
In conclusion, the display of goods is just an invitation to treat and not an
offer, so taking goods from shelves does not mean that a person is in contract with
any shop.

Second Issue
A contract is an agreement enforceable by law
3
. A contract will be bound
when there is an offer, acceptance, intention to be bound and as well as consideration.
An agreement exists when there are acceptance and offer. Section 2(b) of the
Contracts Act states that acceptance takes place when a person gives an affirmative
answer to the proposal made to him, in this case the proposal is said to be accepted
and becomes a promise. In order for the agreement to be legally enforceable, there
must be an intention of parties to be legally bound and consideration must be also
provided in order to perform the promise made. As for consideration, Section 2(d) of
the Contracts Act 1950 states that when, at the desire of the promisor, the promisee
or any other person has done or abstained from doing, or does or abstains from
doing, or promises to do or to abstain from doing, something, such act or abstinence
or promise is called a consideration for the promise. One will intend to bind into a
contract by providing consideration.

In one case which has occurred under the English can give a clearer picture of
when a sale takes place when a good it taken from the shelf by a buyer and put into
the trolley or when it is put to a cashier and then paid. The case of Pharmaceutical
Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists
4
clearly illustrates the sequence of a
buying process. In this case, the display of goods is just an invitation to treat; the
court decided that that the sale exists only at the cashiers desk. When the item is put
to the cashier, this indicates an offer made by a customer to purchase the item. When
a cashier takes a good and tells the price, this presents his or her acceptance of the
offer. Hence, there is an agreement between parties. Once payment is made by the
customer i.e. consideration is provided, and there is a clear intention from both
parties, the agreement becomes legally enforceable. So the contract is formed.

3
Section 2 (h) Contract Act 1950
4
[1953] EWCA Civ 6
Similarly to the case of Australian Woollen Mills Pty Ltd v The Common wealth
5
,
there is no offer and acceptance in the very beginning and the part has no intention to
bind into the contract. Consideration was not even given as well. The missing in one
of the elements has caused no binding of contracts between the parties.
So this reflects upon the case of Sulaimains that putting all the goods to the
trolley is not enough to make an offer. Contradicting to the case, Sulaiman did not
push it to the cashiers counter, so there was no offer made by him. Even if Sulaiman
put all the goods at the counter, he could still revoke his offer as long as the cashier
have not started to take items and scan the barcode of each item, which will mean the
cashier has accepted his offer. So under Section 5(1) of the Contracts Act 1950, a
proposal may be revoked as long as the other party did not accept it. However, once
acceptance takes place it is not possible to revoke the proposal. If Sulaiman realizes
that he does not have his wallet after his goods were scanned, in this this case it can
be said that he has already bought these goods and there is a contract between him
and the supermarket as there were the offer, acceptance, intention to be bound and the
executory consideration.
In conclusion, the fact that Sulaiman filled up the trolley with goods does not
make him bound to buy these goods. The offer from him to buy these goods only
exists when he puts them at the cashiers counter. As long as he has not done this, he
is free to put all the goods back and the supermarket supervisor is not able to tell that
he bought these goods already and must pay for them. Sulaiman has not breached any
contract and does not have to buy anything.
(1170 Words)



5
(1954) 92 CLR 424