LS311 – Business Law
To: Les Agne, Attorney at law
Re: Potential Causes of Action for Breach of Contract and Specific Performance
During an auction at the World Wide Auction House, CARDWARE had a dress for auction, so Cassie Cardigan went as an auctioneer. The bidding began at $5,000.00 for the dress. It was then raised to $5,500.00 due to Jade bidding. After the bid by Jade, another bid was made by Pearl for $8,500.00. Cassie nodded to Pearl, allowing her to assume that she won the bid. However, Candie, Cassie’s sister told her to sell the dress to Jade because they were close friends. Even though Cassie nodded to Pearl for her bid, she refused to accept the money and give her the dress. After not accepting the money, she stated that Jade had raised five fingers indicating that she was bidding another $500.00. However, nobody seen this action and it appears as it did not happen. This led to Pearl being quite upset and wanting to pursue a lawsuit for breach of contract and to get the dress that is rightfully hers.
A breach of contract is where a party does not hold up to their contractual obligations. Many things can happen for a breach of contract to occur. Things such as failing to perform on time, failing to abide by the terms in the contract, or failing to perform the obligation at all. When Cassie nodded at Pearl for the bid of $8,500.00, it formed a contract because she accepted that offer. Therefore, Cassie would have to give her the dress and Pearl would have to hand over the $8,500.00. Since Cassie refuses to do this and gives the dress to Jade, she is now breaching the contract. This leads to Peral being in the right for carrying out a lawsuit to receive the dress and sue the person or company or breached the contract. Pearl can use the specific performance breach of contract because the dress is rare quality and is not sold in just any store.
On the opposing side, this could be defended by CARDWARE. They can state that there was never a contract made between Cassie and Pearl since she just nodded and smile. In an auction, they must state sold and hit the hammer for the item to be sold to the highest bidder. Since this did not happen, there was no contract made and it was not sold to Pearl. Therefore, Cassie is technically in the right for not giving the merchandise to Pearl when it was not sold to her rightfully during the auction.
With that being said, the court could view the case in either parties favor. On Pearl’s side, she assumed that the nod and smile was an implied acknowledgement of the bid. Therefore, she is in the right to assume that the dress should belong to her and that CARDWARE breached their contract with her. On CARDWARE’s side, Cassie knows the actions rules, and she legally did not take Pearl’s bid. Therefore, the dress is still up for grabs. Depending on how the court wants to view the case, they are both going to have to provide evidence of what was done right and wrong.
Content Team . (2014, December 1). Breach of Contract . Retrieved from Legal Dictonary : https://legaldictionary.net/breach-of-contract/