BUS201 Contract & Agency Law Tutor Marked Assignment | SUSS

Tutor-Marked Assignment (TMA)

This assignment is worth 20% of the final mark for BUS201 Contract & Agency Law.  

The cut-off date for this assignment is 09 February 2025, 2355hrs.  

The total length of the report should be no more than 5 pages (excluding the cover page, table of contents, and list of references), using Times New Roman font, size 12, 1.5-line spacing, and a 2.54-cm margin all around. All pages should be numbered.

In this assignment, you are expected to: 

• Analyse and evaluate decisions of reported cases critically to demonstrate an understanding of the legal principles learnt.  
• Apply Singapore case law and legislation to new situations to solve the problem or determine the most appropriate outcome.  
• Show well-developed written proficiency.   

Note to Students:  

Compose your report using Microsoft Office Word, and save it either as .doc or .docx (preferred).   

You are to include the following particulars in your submission: Course Code, Title of the TMA, SUSS PI No., Your Name and Submission Date.

Question 1  

Chip and Dale are two friends who share a common interest in cycling. They each own an expensive Brompton foldable bicycle, which they use to navigate around Singapore during their cycling expeditions. The portability of the bicycle means that it can be it on public buses or trains without much hassle. 

One day, Chip left his bicycle outside a café as he went inside for a cup of coffee. He thought that he had secured his bicycle properly, but this was not the case. When he returned outside, he found that the bicycle had been stolen. Despite lodging a police report, as well as expending his best efforts in finding the bicycle, he could not locate its whereabouts.   

A few weeks later, Chip decided to buy a second-hand bicycle to replace his stolen bicycle. He searched online and found a discussion forum on a website called “Brompton Bros” for cycling enthusiasts, which also had a “buy and sell” thread. On this discussion thread, there was a seller by the nickname of “Hunter” who was looking to sell his Brompton bicycle. The post by Hunter stated as follows:  

                “One-year-old Brompton bicycle for sale. Model: T Line Urban, titanium construction. Cost was $7,900 but now selling at $4,000. Send

                             a private message to me for a fast deal. Will deliver to your preferred location.”

Chip was delighted to find this post, as the stated selling price of the bicycle in the post was a significant reduction from its usual retail price. Chip did not realise that “Hunter” was the online nickname of Dale, and it was actually Dale who was trying to sell his own Brompton bicycle because he wanted to upgrade to a newer model.  

On the same day that Chip saw the post by Hunter (Dale), which happened to be a Monday, Chip decided to create an online account with the nickname “Chipmunk”. He sent a private message through the website’s messaging function to Hunter (Dale) at 3.00 pm: 

                       “Hi! I am interested in buying the Brompton bicycle mentioned in your post. Can you do a better price, say, $3,500?” 

Hunter (Dale) replied at 4.00 pm (on the same day):  

                              “Hey bro, the listed price is already heavily discounted. I’m only letting it go because I am getting a new one. $4,000 is already the                                              best price. Do you want it?”  

Chip replied further at 5.00 pm (on the same day):  

                        “I am interested, let me think about it. Can you reserve it for me until this Friday?

Hunter (Dale) replied at 6.00 pm (on the same day):

                    “OK, but you must transfer a $100 deposit to my bank account via PayNow by tonight. If you decide not to buy in the end, this deposit is                                     non-refundable. My mobile number is 8766 9300.” 

When Chip received and read Hunter’s (Dale) message at 7.00 pm on the same day, he realised from the given mobile number that the online persona of Hunter is his friend Dale. Chip felt that this would make things easier. He quickly texted Dale through his mobile phone: 

                       “Hey, I am the ‘Chipmunk’ who messaged you on the website Brompton Bros to buy your bicycle. Now that I know it is you selling the bicycle, there is no need for us to talk about a deposit. I will let you know by this Friday whether I’m buying it.”  

Dale did not read this text message, as he was on a vacation in Thailand at that time and was using a different mobile phone. Even though Chip did not receive any further reply from Dale, Chip did not transfer the deposit of $100 as he thought that he does not need to do so since they were friends.  

On Wednesday (of that same week), while Dale was still in Thailand, he received a private message (through the Brompton Bros website) from another person called “Zipper”, who also wanted to buy his bicycle. As Dale thought that there was no reply from Chipmunk (Chip), Dale agreed to sell the bicycle to Zipper.  

When Dale returned to Singapore on Thursday (of that same week), Dale finally saw Chip’s text message on his original mobile phone. As Dale had already agreed to sell the bicycle to Zipper, Dale immediately called Chip to explain that he could no longer sell the bicycle to Chip. However, Chip was not happy about this, as he felt that there was some sort of agreement between them whereby the bicycle was reserved for Chip. 

• Explain whether there is a valid contract between Chip and Dale for the sale of the bicycle. In your answer, you should identify and discuss the four (4) elements of a contract.  (This means that you should also state and define the four elements of a contract, discuss the relevant legal rules associated with them, and apply the legal rules concerning the facts and circumstances described in the scenario.)  
• Identify and discuss one (1) method of alternative dispute resolution (“ADR”) which you would recommend to Chip and Dale to resolve their dispute. In your answer, you should compare and contrast your recommended ADR method with litigation and provide reasons for your recommendation. (You are not required to cite the Rules of Court.)