The offeror has the choice to set a specific time until which the acceptance should reach him.Consequently, an offer expressed to continue for a fixed time may be legally retracted before the expiration of the time limit unless previously accepted to which acceptance may be communicated.Under the dispatch principle, the postal rule is one-sided and unfair for the offeror.Tags: Generalized Assignment ProblemSample Research Paper OutlinesDissertation DeadlinesArguments Against The Existence Of God EssayCreative Writing Courses London EveningRomanticism In Literature EssayResearch Paper Sample For High SchoolMers Assignment Of MortgageMarket Analysis Sample Business PlanScripture In Context Essays On The Comparative Method
This is true, but there is a weakness in his judgment, for he has not considered that there is always possibility for the acceptor to check the succession of his e-mail by using telephone.
Furthermore, Capps argues that the acceptor has some control over a sent e-mail in that it can often be recalled Under this provision, if a data message has been made conditional on receipt, the data message is treated as though it has never been sent until the acknowledgement is received.
Therefore one of the contracting parties bears a risk by choosing the postal services for a preferred method of communication.
Certainly, the offeror is the party who bears that risk, under effective-on-dispatch-postal rule.
And so it might go on ad infinitum” Century, it is no longer relevant because of technology development and instantaneous methods of communication.
Both of the parties can always check whether the offer or acceptance is successfully delivered by using telex, telephone etc..If they would like to protect themselves from the postal rule effect, they could use instantaneous method, which will be more safe and secure.Therefore, if A makes an offer by telephone, and B sends the acceptance by e-mail that never reaches A, then A will not be legally bound and risk is put on B’s decision.Postal rule is no longer needed because in the 21 Century, contracts can be concluded in seconds, using both instantaneous and non-instantaneous methods of communication with little or no risk of loss and delay.Therefore, it should be abandoned as an obstacle to fairness in contract law. As a result, it does not apply to instantaneous methods of communication (i.e.I confirm that I have read and understand the definitions of plagiarism, collusion and the fabrication of data as described in the University's Code of Practice on Assessment.I confirm that I have not committed plagiarism or fabrication of data when completing this submitted piece of work, nor have I colluded with any other student in the preparation and production of this work. It was arbitrary, because there was no range of choice for communication and the postal services were the only option for distance contracting.In the case of communication by post, the general rule is that “Dispatch of a letter or telegram of acceptance by the offeree terminates the offeror’s power of revocation.Loss or delay of the letter of acceptance is immaterial and subsequent death of either party can have no effect on its formation” Century was that the postal service had no alternative methods of communication.He is the one that can manipulate the offer and introduce conditions.The offeree is less likely to change the conditions.