The main point for consideration in this situation is whether the initial agreement between Packard and Hewlett constitutes as a contract that has a legal relationship, and if so, is Hewlett within his rights to void the established contract and sell the laptop to the offeror with a higher price. The General Principle of Law here would imply here that Hewlett and Packard, are in a contract due to consensus ad idem, in that a meeting of minds must be between the two parties to be counted as a contract (Don Mayer, 2011). This contract is enforceable as the following factors are present:
1)Offer: Hewlett had made a bilateral offer to his classmates to sell his laptop at $800/-. This is an offer as the offeror had indicated his intention to sell his laptop to any member of his class at $800.
2)Acceptance: Packard had clearly communicated his unconditional acceptance of his offer, thereby closing the offer.
3)Consideration and Legal Relations: Consideration under the Law is defined as “some right, interest, profit or benefit accruing to one party, or some forbearance detriment, loss or responsibility given, suffered or undertaken by the other” Currie v Misa (1875) (InBrief: Free Legal Information, 2014). Hewlett promised to do the transaction of the laptop tomorrow after he transferred his data in the laptop and Packard agreed. This is executory consideration and shows that due consideration has been done on the part of the promisee. Legal relations are thus also created.
They are thus in a legally binding contract and either party can sue should there be a breach. Hewlett is not able to revoke his offer once accepted even if someone were to offer him a higher price for the laptop. However, Hewlett sold his laptop to Compac for $1000, discharging his contract with Packard by Breach. Hewlett has by his own act disabled himself from performing the contract and Packard can thus
bring action against him for the Breach of Contract. The Principle guiding this was established in Synge v Synge (1894). Recommendation and Conclusion
In conclusion, Packard is able to bring action against Hewlett for selling the laptop to Compac even after an initial contract was established with Packard. He is able to sue under Discharge of Contract by Breach and the Court will likely move possession of the laptop back to Packard after Packard pays Hewlett the $800 as agreed. Hewlett will also have to refund Compac his $1000.