Case No. 46 Camrex Contractors Marine Ltd. v. Reliance Marine Applicators.Inc Fe

Question

Case No. 46 Camrex Contractors Marine Ltd. v. Reliance Marine Applicators.Inc Federal Court, Eastern District of New York 579 ESupp. 1420 (1984) OFFER AND ACCEPTANCEREPUDIATION blasting and coating them. Defendant corporation sought to hire plaintiff to service two ships. On October 27, 1978, Plaintiff sent to defendant by telex an offer to service the ntiff corporation was in the business of maintaining ships' surfaces by grit surface of two ships for $1.47 per square foot. Included in plaintiff's telex was a detailed statement of the work plaintiff would perform, as well as proposed schedules for the work and payment. In response, defendant sent a telex the same date with a counterproposal of $1.46 per square foot. Also on the same day plaintiff wired back, agreeing to the price of $1.46 for one ship and asking $1.47 for the other ship, and proposing a price of $1.37 to service areas of the ships not previously mentioned. Defendant responded on October 30 saying: "With... reference we accept your offer as noted in our two aforementioned telexes. However regarding your request of $1.37... we reserve the right to discuss same with you to a mutual satisfactory agreement when you visit us this weekend." to your telex of October 27, 1978 On November 3 plaintiff started work on one ship. Two days later, defendant informed plaintiff by telex that it was changing the contract and that it would pay $1,000,000 lump work on both ships. This arrangement would result in less money being paid to Plainif agreed to the new tems after determining they were "commercially sum for the plaintiff. viable" Plaintiff wired defendant, "We accept your offer of 1,000,000 dollars ...". Defendant responded on the same day, "Reference. your recent offer.. . we accept. Plaintiff finished the work then commenced this action for breach of contract. FIRST ISSUE: Did the exchange of telexes on October 27 create a contract? DECISION: Yes. REASONING: An offer is a manifestation of willingness to enter into a bargain. nteroffer is a proposed substitute bargain that terminates the original offer and continues otiations. Acceptance of an offer is a manifestation of assent to the terms of an o the neg In this case, the parties' conduct and expressions displayed a mutual intent to reac offer binding agreement. Plaintiff's original telex, by its specificity in prices, schedules. inclusions, and exclusions, evidenced an intent to make an offer that could, upon acceptance, create a contract. Defendan sonstituited a counterofter. Plaintiffresponse proposing another price change consa t's response, seeking to change the price.

Explanation / Answer

1) A rejection of the counter offer of $1.46 and $1.47 by the defendant and the plaintiff's acceptance of the earlier offer of $1.46 by defendant constitutes an acceptance of an offer and hence a contract exists.

2) The fliers sent to various shipyards and marinas may not constitute an offer as it was sent to multiple bodies and persons. Also an offer needs to be specific and directed and a general flier can only be best construed as invitations for an offer.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse C
• Subjects

---

---

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.