CONTRACT AND

ESTIMATION
BFC31602

NAME

MATRIC NUMBER

MOHD.KHAIRIL AMRI BIN KAMARUZAMAN

AF120162

MUHAMMAD FIRDAUS BIN MD YASIN

AF120036

MUHAMAD AIMAN BIN ABD RASHID

AF120101

ASMAHANI BINTI BARJOK

AF120086

NOORATIQAH BINTI MOHD ZIN

AF120119

NORFATIHIN BINTI NOORLISAM

AF120145

QUESTION 12:

Azlan and Yusuf agreed to sell and buy a piece of land.

The land was identified, its area was noted, the price
was settled, and the parties also agreed on the mode of
payment. This agreement was later written down and
one of the clauses stated that the agreement was a
provisional one subject to the approval of the lawyers
of the respective parties. When the lawyer of Azlan
completed the documents of sale after approval and
sent the same to Yusuf, the latter refused to sign the
document relating to sale. Is there an enforceable
contract between the parties?

INTRODUCTION:
The issues that are to be discussed based on
the question are as follows;
Is communication between Azlan and
Yusuf is completed?
Payment has not been made.
Is the agreement can be enforceable by
law?

FIRST ISSUE:
Is communication between Azlan and Yusuf
is completed?

Related laws:

Section 4 - Communication, when complete

Section 4(1) - The communication of proposal is complete when it
comes to the knowledge of the person whom it is made.
Section 4(2) The communication of an acceptance is complete
Section 4(2)(a) As against proposer, when it is put in a course of
transmission to him, so as to be out of the power of the acceptor.
Section 4(2)(b) as against the proposer, when it comes to the
knowledge of the proposer.

Section 5(2) An acceptance may be revoked at any time before the

communication of the acceptance is complete as against the
acceptor, but not afterwards.

Section 2(b) when the person to whom the proposal is made

signifies his assent thereto, the proposal is said to be accepted: a
proposal, when accepted, becomes a promise.

Application of laws:
Both

parties agreed to sell and buy the land at the

earlier stage, but their communication is
considered incomplete because Yusuf did not sign
the selling and buying document.
In this case, it is said that Yusuf reject the offer,
thus Azlans party did not receive any kind of
agreement from Yusuf.

Conclusion:
Based on section 2(b), Azlans proposal in
writing form is not accepted by Yusuf. Thus,
communication between Azlan and Yusuf is
completed because it came to Yusufs
knowledge. But, the contract is enforceable as
Yusuf did not want to sign it.

SECOND ISSUE:
Payment has not been made.

Related Laws:

Section 7 Acceptance must be absolute. In order to convert

a proposal into a promise the acceptance mustSection 7(a) - be absolute and unqualified.
Section 7(b) be expressed in some usual and reasonable
manner, unless the proposal prescribes the manner in which
it is to be accepted. If the proposal prescribes a manner in
which it is to be accepted, and the acceptance is not made in
that manner, the proposer may, within a reasonable time after
the acceptance is communicated to him, insist that his
proposal shall be accepted in the prescribed manner, and not
otherwise; but, if he fails to do so, he accepts the acceptance.

Application Of Laws:
Yusuf

has not pay for the land.

This means that he can cancel the contract
without losing both parties.

Conclusion:
Even

though contract had been performed

earlier by oral, but it was cancelled by act.
Where Yusuf choose to not sign the
document of selling and buying and he also
did not make any payment.

THIRD ISSUE:
Is the agreement can be enforceable
by law?

Related Laws:
2(i) an agreement which is
enforceable by law at the option of one or
more of the parties thereto, but not at the
option of the other or others, is a voidable
contract.

Section

Application Of Laws:
Yusuf

action is enforceable if he did not

want to pursue the contract as he has not
sign the contract.
The contract is enforceable by law if Yusuf
fulfill all the above elements.

GENERAL CONCLUSION
What

is communication?
Explain requirement of written contract.
What is contract?

QUESTION 22
a)

Sulaiman obtained a loan of RM5,000

from Public Bank. When Public Bank
served him a notice to pay he promised to
give the title deeds of his house as security.
Sulaiman did not hand over the documents
as promised. Public Bank sues Sulaiman
for specific performance of the promise.

INTRODUCTION

In the above sample question, to say that the issue in the

question is whether performance of the promise between
Sulaiman and Public Bank or not.
This issued applied of a contract, whether the issue is on
offer, acceptance, consideration or intention to create legal
relations, for ultimately one has to conclude whether or not
there was a contract between the parties.

FIRST ISSUE:
Was Sulaiman broke the promise with the
Public Bank?

Related Laws

According to Section 74(1) in Contract Act 1950, when a contract broken the
contract, compensation for any loss or damage caused to him thereby, which
naturally arose in the usual course of things from the breach, or which the parties
knew, when they made the contract, to be likely to result from the breach of it.

According to Section 74(1) in Contract Act 1950, when a contract has been broken,
if a sum is named in the contract as the amount to be paid in case of such breach, or
if the contract contains any other stipulation by way of penalty, the party
complaining of the breach is entitled, whether or not actual damage or loss is
proved to have been caused thereby, to receive from the party who has broken the
contract reasonable compensation not exceeding the amount so named or, as the
case may be, the penalty stipulated for.

According to Section 124 in Contract Act 1950, Bankers, factors, wharfingers,

advocates and policy brokers may, in the absence of a contract to the contrary,
retain, as a security for a general balance of account, any goods bailed to them; but
no other persons have a right to retain, as a security for such balance, goods bailed
to them, unless there is an express contract to that effect.

Application Of Laws:
Sulaiman had received RM 5,000 from Public

Bank but when Public Bank served him a notice to

pay back the loan, he promised to give the title
deeds of his house as security
After a few months he still not hand over the
documents of the tittle deeds of his house as what
he promised to the Public Bank.
So from this case, it can be said that Sulaiman had
broke the promise.

Conclusion
Sulaiman

had broken the promise, so on

behalf of the Public Bank,they have their
right to take an action to Sulaiman.

SECOND ISSUE:
Were Public Bank sues Sulaiman for
specific performance of the promise?

Related Laws

According to Section 86 in Contract Act 1950, any variance, made

without the suretys consent, in the terms of the contract between
the principal debtor and the creditor, discharges the surety as to
transactions subsequent to the variance.

According to Section 94 in Contract Act 1950, a surety is entitled to

the benefit of every security which the creditor has against the
principal debtor at the time when the contract of suretyship is
entered into, whether the surety knows of the existence of such
security or not; and, if the creditor loses or, without the consent of
the surety, parts with the security, the surety is discharged to the
extent of the value of the security
.
According to Section 98 in Contract Act 1950, in every contract of
guarantee there is an implied promise by the principal debtor to
indemnify the surety; and the surety is entitled to recover from the
principal debtor whatever sum he has rightfully paid under the
guarantee, but not sums which he has paid wrongfully.

Application Of Laws:

Since the section 94 in contract Act 1950 stated so, Public

Bank had given RM 5,000 to Sulaiman and as a further
security for the RM 5,000 by a mortgage of Sulaimans title
deeds of his house but suddenly after a few months Sulaiman
did not given his title deeds of his house that means
Sulaiman had cancel his mortgage. Public Bank becomes
insolvent and they sue Sulaiman on the guarantee.

Conclusion
Even

the existence of a contract in writing

at the beginning, but the performances of
the promise had been broken by Sulaiman
because he still did not paid back the loan
and did not give his title deeds of his house.
Public Bank has their right sue Sulaiman on
what he had done.

THIRD ISSUE:
Is this considered as performance of the
promise?

Related Laws:

According to Section 39 (1) in Contract Act 1950, where a promisor has made an offer of
performance to the promisee, and the offer has not been accepted, the promisor is not
responsible for non-performance, nor does he thereby lose his rights under the contract

According to Section 40 in Contract Act 1950, when a party to a contract has refused to
perform, or disabled himself from performing, his promise in its entirety, the promisee may
put an end to the contract, unless he has signified, by words or conduct, his acquiescence in its
continuance.

According to Section 48 in Contract Act 1950, when a promise is to be performed on a certain

day, and the promisor has undertaken to perform it without application by the promisee, the
promisor may perform it at any time during the usual hours of business on the day and at the
place at which the promise ought to be application performed.

According to Section 51 in Contract Act 1950, the performance of any promise may be made
in any manner, or at any time which the promisee prescribes or sanctions.

According to Section 55 in Contract Act 1950When a contract consists of reciprocal promises,

such that one of them cannot be performed, or that its performance cannot be claimed till the
other has been performed, and the promisor of the promise last mentioned fails to perform it,
the promisor cannot claim the performance of the reciprocal promise, and must make
compensation to the other party to the contract for any losswhich the other party may sustain
by the non-performance of the contract.

Application Of Law:
In

this case, it is necessaries to apply the

law as what state at the above in Contract
Act 1950, since specific of the
performances are failure.

It is valid for the Public Bank to sue

Sulaiman on what he had done in this
performances.

GENERAL CONCLUSION
Is

the contract is remedies by the

performance?
What is contract?

QUESTION 22
b)

i am pleased to hear of your engagement

with Salwa. It gives me great pleasure to
tell you that I will pay you RM500 every
month after your marriage till you stand on
your own feet in the tourist travel
business.Faiz marries Salwa and sues Zaid
to enforce the promise made by his
uncle.Advice Faiz.

INTRODUCTION
Based

on the question above, the issue is

does legal contract occur between Faiz and
Zaid.

FIRST ISSUE:
Zaid made an offer

Related Laws

Section 2(a) 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

Section 2 (d) when, at the desire of the promisor, the

promise 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

Application Of Law

Zaid made an offer to Faiz. He communicate his offer by sending a letter to

Faiz.
In that letter, Zaid make an offer to pay Faiz RM500 every month after Faiz
marriage Salwa till Faiz stand on his own feet in the tourist travel business.
In this case an offer is expressed in form ( letter).
This is valid offer because it has been communiacated to the party( Faiz)
for whom it is intended by letter.
The communication of a proposal is complete when it comes to the Faiz
knowledge.

Conclusion
Based

on section 2(a), Zaid made a

proposal by writing letter to Faiz which
states that he will be paying Faiz RM500
per month after Faiz married to Salwa.
Therefore, it can be say that Zaid made a
proposal to Faiz.

SECOND ISSUE:
Faiz accept the offer by conduct

Related Laws:

Section 4(2) the communication of acceptance is complete

Section 4(2)(a)- as against proposer, when it is put in a course of transmission to
him, so as to be out of the power of the acceptor.
Section 4(2)(b)- as against the acceptor, when it comes to the knowledge of the
proposer

Section 7- In order to convert a proposal into a promise the acceptance must-

Section 7(a) - be absolute and unqualified.

Section 7(b) be expressed in some usual and reasonable manner, unless the
proposal prescribes the manner in which it is to be accepted. If the proposal
prescribes a manner in which it is to be accepted, and the acceptance is not made in
that manner, the proposer may, within a reasonable time after the acceptance is
communicated to him, insist that his proposal shall be accepted in the prescribed
manner, and not otherwise; but, if he fails to do so, he accepts the acceptance.

Section 8- Performance of the conditions of a proposal, or the acceptance of any

consideration for a reciprocal promise which may be offered with a proposal, is an
acceptance of the proposal.

Application Of Law
Faiz

has made an acceptance through an

implied form or by conduct.

This

conduct refer to the Faiz is marrying

Salwa as stated in the offering that made by
Zaid.

Conclusion
Even

though Faiz did not accept it by oral but he is

considered to accept by conduct.
Referring to Section 7(b), Faiz accept the offer by
marrying Salwa as stated in the letter.
The letter itself is stating the manner of the
acceptance should be made.
Therefore it is to be considered that Faiz accept the
proposal.

THIRD ISSUE:
Does the contract enforceable by law?

Related Laws

Section 9 So far as the proposal or acceptance of any

promise is made in words, the promise is said to be express.
So far as the proposal or acceptance is made otherwise than
in words, the promise is said to be implied.

Section 10(1)- All agreements are contracts if they are made

by the free consent of parties competent to contract, for a
lawful consideration and with lawful consideration and with
lawful object, and are not hereby expressly declared to be
void.

Section 10(2)- Nothing herein contained shall affect any law

by which any contract is required to be made in writing or in
the presence of witnesses, or any law relating to the
registration of documents.

Application Of Law
The

contract between Faiz and Zaid is

enforceable by law.
The contract contains an valid offer that has
been made by Zaid through the letter.
The acceptance also has be done through
the conduct of Faiz married Salwa.
The contract between Faiz and Zaid can be
enforceable by law if Zaid didnt pay Faiz
RM500.

GENERAL CONCLUSION
What is an offer?
The acceptance of an offer by what?
What is contract ?
Does the contract is enforceable by
the law?