Acceptance - Contract law

[@iringireniwemfurayvetteari1945]

Please provide us with video about the privity doctrine
Thank you for always helping us to understand

[@revillahauma5622]

Thanks sir, well elaborated.. Please explain "intention to create a legal relationship"

[@MutyabaConrad]

For a contract to be valid, the parties to it must intent to be bound by the contract they are entering in to. If they didn't truly intend, then the contract isn't binding on them. The general rule is that for contracts of a domestic nature, eg: between children and parents, such parties don't intend to create legal relations ( of course there are exceptions ) whereas for contracts of a business or commercial nature the general rule is that those that enter them intend to be legally bound by them ( although there are exceptions as well to this )

[@fentdi9527]

@@MutyabaConrad Can acceptance be communicated through a third party

[@MutyabaConrad]

@@fentdi9527 Yes. Provided it doesn't offend any of the rules that I talked about. Then it would be a valid acceptance if communicated through another party.

[@fentdi9527]

@@MutyabaConrad But I saw in rust v abbey life assurance Co where silence was considered as acceptance

[@MutyabaConrad]

@@fentdi9527 as a general rule silence can not amount to acceptance. There are however some few exceptions. Read that whole case to understand it better. What was the exception that you found after reading the full case ?
I will at a later date make you a class on all the exceptions.

[@rubangakeneinnocent4787]

Thanks

[@MutyabaConrad]

@@rubangakeneinnocent4787 you are welcome