Search results for 'tag:Whom tag:Invitations' matching tags 'Whom' and 'Invitations'

Re: creams and detergents

Goodman — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:19:09 GMT

Mr. Miclawer,

I wasnât going to expand this pluralization discussion on âcreamsâ and âwinesâ.
But it really bothered the heck out of me for two reasons.
1) I really wanted to find out if I was really blowing hot air on this subject
because of my misunderstanding of this topic, and 2) if there is another side of the usage
I am not aware of.
This is perhaps not relevant to the discussion but to establish my point, I think it needs
to be said. Mrs. Milton whom I learned English from was an excellent English teacher who
also had taught for 5 years at the Beijing University, which is a top University in China, by
invitation of the Government. Many of her students had landed positions working for the
Chinese Government and the U.N. as translators and interpreters. I was very blessed to be
among her students. Most of my English foundation was learned from her. And I was really
surprised to see your examples pluralizing âcreamâ and âwineâ. By your earlier examples, which I
compared with the information found on the WEB, I must ask this question. Am I to understand
that itâs completely grammatical to say in a restaurant âmay I have 2 waters and soups?â. I know
we hear that all the time but if we are discussing the whether a particular usage is grammatically
correct, running into this type of scenario is inevitable. Here are some âsupportsâ you had
asked for which may not may not be validated to your satisfaction. No doubt, you are the
English authority and perhaps possess âsuperiorityâ over many frequented this forum and I donât
mean to sound like challenging your examples, let alone to waste anymore of your time.
Nonetheless, as a serious learner, Iâd owe the real answers to myself and the learners if I just
accepted your answers as given. I may be wrong with my search result and you are correct.
And If so, here is my âadvanced apologyâ.

Nouns only countable nouns can be either singular or plural. ... He had some ice cream on
his face. He had an ice cream. mass. countable ...
www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/tta/wc/nouns.htm - 21k - Cached - Similar pages

http://ajaja.paradoxinc.org/Basic/Grammar/CountAndNoncount.ht

Liquids: beer, milk, coffee, blood, cream, juice, honey, gasoline, oil, shampoo, soup, tea, water, wine.

Solids and semi-solids: Bread, butter, cheese, ice, ice cream, lettuce, toast, meat, beef, chicken, fish, ham, lamb, pork, chalk, 
copper, cotton, glass, gold, iron, , soap, tin, toothpaste, wood, wool,

http://leo.stcloudstate.edu/grammar/countnon.html

A Revision of the RulesThe exceptions require that the rule for pluralizing be revised: count nouns and nouns used 
in a count sense can be pluralized; noncount nouns and nouns used in a noncount sense cannot.

	Pluralizes with -s	Does not Pluralize
Count Noun	X
Count Use	X
Noncount Noun		X
Noncount Use		X

http://au.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080425090142AAom2ui

Answers (4)

If coffee is an uncountable noun, cream certainly is by common sense. Thus the rule applies.

Â· Answerer 1

Many nouns can be used as countables or uncountables. It depends on whether you are thinking of a substance or
a single serving or object made of the substance. So:

Beer is fattening (uncountable - the substance)
Don't drink more than three beers a day. (Countable - servings)

I love chocolate (uncountable - the substance)
Get me a box of chocolates (countable - individual pieces)

A vase made of blown glass (uncountable - the substance)
A glass of wine (A single piece / artifact)

Coffee gives me indigestion (the substance - uncountable)
I need at least three coffees to wake up on a morning (countable - individual servings)

2 months ago

http://www3.law.cuny.edu/wc/students/multilingual/articles.html

Uncountable nouns often refer to drinks and food, other general substances, or concepts (meat, tea, steel, information, justice):

Examples of Uncountable Nouns in English:

Food and Drink: bacon, beef, beer, bread, butter, cabbage, candy, cauliflower, chicken, chocolate, coffee, corn,
cream, fish, fruit, juice, lettuce, meat, milk, oil, pasta, rice, salt, spinach, sugar, tea, water, whiskey, wine, yogurt.
General Substances: air,cement, clay, coal, copper, dirt, dust, foam, gasoline, gold, ice, leather, paper, petroleum,
plastic, rain, rubber, silver, soap, steel, wood, wool.
Abstract nouns: abandonment, access, adultery, advice, alimony, anger, anguish, arson, authentication, beauty, capacity,
conduct, confidence, courage, deprivation, desperation, discretion, employment, empowerment, evidence, extortion, fortune,
fun, happiness, health, honesty, housing, information, insurance, intelligence, intent, knowledge, land, love, malice, negligence,
poverty, privacy, real estate, sadness, satisfaction, strength, truth, wealth.
Others: biology, clothing, darkness, equipment, furniture, gossip, homework, jewelry, luggage, machinery, mail, money, music,
news, poetry, pollution, research, scenery, traffic, transportation, violence, weather, weight, work.

Some uncountable nouns (except for concepts) can be turned into countable nouns by preposing a phrase to them
(two bottles of wine, a bar of soap, a piece of information, an act of violence, a burst of anger, a piece of evidence).

e.g. The defendant's lawyer is sure the judge will accept new evidence in this case.

vs. The defendant's lawyer is sure the judge will accept three new pieces of evidence in this case.

Some uncountable nouns can be used in the plural, but their meaning changes:

experience / experiences: e.g., He had to rely on experience / I lived unforgettable experiences

e-mail invitation to banquet

Anonymous — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 22:40:06 GMT

Hi John,

Spring is here and that means that we, the Annual Banquet Preparation Committee, should be running around to get this banquet ready and that is exactly what we have doing for the past two months. Also, we have been contacting a prominent member of our profession to speak to us at the banquet and I have a feeling that that person will be a very high-ranking, prominent politician whom you will know that person instantly if I mentioned his first name. I want to let you know that we are working hard to get this banguet just right and make it our best ever.

As part of that overall effort, we are sending a limited number of invitations to post-banquet tea time with the invited speaker and those members will consist of those members whom we feel have made great contributions to our organization -- and one of those people, we feel, is you. Would you be able to accept our invitation to tea time with the guest. I am sure you would find the time with the guest very informing.

If you are able to attend, please respond to this e-mail invitation by June ***, so we can have a seat ready for you.

Thank you for being an active member for the past year and hope to see you at the banquet.

Best wishes,

***,

head of the

Banquet Preparation Committee

Re: i just want to help u

Anonymous — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 18:07:35 GMT

PLEASE HELP ME HW CAN ARE CAN USA INVITATION LETTER ,I NEED WHOM TO SENT IT FOR ME TO COMPLETE MY EDUCATION LETTER ,I NEED YOUR HELP IF U CAN HELP ME OUT

Re: Discussion essay (Law)

Clive — Sun, 22 Jul 2007 06:02:28 GMT

Hi again,

I just had time for a very quick look. I've marked in red a few places I think you should look at again.

Clive

A contract may be defined as an agreement between two or more parties that is intended to be legally binding. The essential elements of a contract are: offer, acceptance, consideration (not required for contracts under seal), intention to be bound, mutuality, capacity and legality. Graw (2002 p. 34)
In my opinion, the elements of offer, acceptance and intention to be bound present the major in issues to this case. Therefore, the discussion will be focused on these three elements.
An agreement consists of an offer and acceptance. At least two parties are required; one of them, the offeror, makes an offer which the other, the offeree, accepts. Moreover, there should be a strong promise or intent that will become binding on the offeror as soon as it is accepted by the offeree. Graw (2002 p. 25)

Wenâs promise to sell laptops to Jo

Wen mailed a letter to Jo clearly stating and outlining terms and conditions. So, there was a promise on Wenâs part.
To distinguish an offer from a mere supply of information, see: Harvey v Facey [1893] AC 552 Privy Council. For an invitation to treat:
Pharmaceutical Society (GB) v Boots Cash Chemists <<< I used to work for these guys (Southern) Ltd [1952] 2 QB 795.
Fisher v Bell [1961] 1 QB 394. Lord Parker (at 399):
âIt is perfectly clear that according to the ordinary law of contract the display of an article with a price on it in a shop window is merely an invitation to treat. It is in no sense an offer for sale, the acceptance of which constitutes a contract.â

Wenâs intention to honour his promise

It can be argued that Wenâs promise offering to sell the laptops to Jo was not necessarily legally binding at the time when Wen mailed his letter. However, because of the previous course of dealings between Jo and Wen, and because Wen faxed a letter to Jo the following day to revoke his offer, and telephoned Jo on the 19th of March to confirm the cancellation of his offer, there was a presumption that the contract would be carried out as agreed.
Australian Woollen Mills Pty Ltd v Commonwealth (1954) 92 CLR 424 High Court (at 457):
âwhat is alleged to be an offer should have been intended to give rise, on the doing of the act, to an obligation â¦ in the absence of such an intention, actual or imputed, the alleged âofferâ cannot lead to a contract: there, indeed, in such a case no true âofferâ.â

Communication of Wenâs offer

An offer must be communicated to the offeree before it can be accepted. Graw (2002 p. 48).
Wen mailed his offer to Jo responding to her enquiry. Jo received Wen's letter and replied to it immediately. Thereâs no doubt that Wenâs offer was properly communicated in this case.

An acceptance is a final and unqualified acceptance of the terms of an offer. To make a binding contract the acceptance must exactly match the offer. The offeree or an authorised agent acting on the offeree's behalf must accept all the terms of the offer. Powell v Lee (1908) 99 LT 284.

Jo's acceptance

On March 19th Jo received Wenâs letter and responded immediately agreeing to his offer herself. Hyde v Wrench (1840) 3 Beav 334
Furthermore, Jo agreed to all terms and conditions outlined in Wen's offer and communicated her acceptance via mail. In this case, the postal rule applies. The postal rule states that the acceptance will be complete as soon as the letter is properly posted. This rule was formulated in the Adams v Lindsell (1818) 1 B & Ald 681.

I think Jo acted within the guidelines of accepted conduct that exists between traders when she responded to Wen's letter, effectively accepting his offer.

Revocation of Wen's Offer

The revocation of an offer must take place before the offer is accepted by the party to whom the offer was intended. The withdrawal of the offer is ineffective until it arrives. Payne v Cave (1789) 3 TR 148; 100 ER 502.

Just like an offer itself, a revocation of the offer must be properly communicated. The revocation can be communicated by various means. All that is required is that the offeree becomes aware that the offer has been withdrawn.
Byrne & Co. v Leon Van Tienhoven & Co (1880) 5 CPD 344
Dickinson v Dodds (1876) 2 ChD 463
Henthorn v Fraser [1892] 2 Ch 27 (at 32)
Lord Hershell:
â[a revocation] can be no missing word? effectual than the offer itself, unless brought to the mind of the person whom the offer is made.â

From the given facts we know Wen had faxed a letter to Jo revoking his offer before Jo received the letter and replied to it. Therefore, there was no offer at the time when Jo replied to Wenâs letter and hence, there was no acceptance.
It could be argued that Jo had no knowledge of Wenâs offer of withdrawal. Due to the fault in her fax machine, the letter she received was unreadable.
I think it is reasonable to assume that most businesses operate fully functional appliances. In addition, fax was an acceptable means of communication between the two parties.
In my opinion, there was no contract between Wen and Jo in this case.

Bibliography

Graw, S 2002 An Introduction to the Law of Contract, Lawbook Co, Sydney
C.O.L.I.N. Tutorial on Contract Law, ANU College of Law, viewed on 20 July 2007
http://law.anu.edu.au/colin/
Dr Robert N Moles 2006 Contract Law, Networked Knowledge, viewed on 21 July 2007
http://netk.net.au/ContractLaw.asp

or http://picccs.mine.nu/pics/assignment1.doc

Re: Discussion essay (Law)

Alexgn — Sun, 22 Jul 2007 03:02:10 GMT

Clive thanks for your reply.

Offeror and offeree are the legal terms which often used when lawyers and law students refer to the law cases.
I donât like the term âmajor onesâ. It sounds very informal. I donât think it is appropriate term to use in a law essay.
Donât worry about the presumption. It is legal point to do with intention which took place before the offer was mailed to Jo.

I've edited my essay. Here's another version

A contract may be defined as an agreement between two or more parties that is intended to be legally binding. The essential elements of a contract are: offer, acceptance, consideration (not required for contracts under seal), intention to be bound, mutuality, capacity and legality. Graw (2002 p. 34)
In my opinion, the elements of offer, acceptance and intention to be bound present the major in issues to this case. Therefore, the discussion will be focused on these three elements.
An agreement consists of an offer and acceptance. At least two parties are required; one of them, the offeror, makes an offer which the other, the offeree, accepts. Moreover, there should be a strong promise or intent that will become binding on the offeror as soon as it is accepted by the offeree. Graw (2002 p. 25)

Wenâs promise to sell laptops to Jo

Wen mailed a letter to Jo clearly stating and outlining terms and conditions. So, there was a promise on Wenâs part.
To distinguish an offer from a mere supply of information, see: Harvey v Facey [1893] AC 552 Privy Council. For an invitation to treat:
Pharmaceutical Society (GB) v Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) Ltd [1952] 2 QB 795.
Fisher v Bell [1961] 1 QB 394. Lord Parker (at 399):
âIt is perfectly clear that according to the ordinary law of contract the display of an article with a price on it in a shop window is merely an invitation to treat. It is in no sense an offer for sale, the acceptance of which constitutes a contract.â

Wenâs intention to honour his promise

It can be argued that Wenâs promise offering to sell the laptops to Jo was not necessarily legally binding at the time when Wen mailed his letter. However, because of the previous course of dealings between Jo and Wen, and because Wen faxed a letter to Jo the following day to revoke his offer, and telephoned Jo on the 19th of March to confirm the cancellation of his offer, there was a presumption that the contract would be carried out as agreed.
Australian Woollen Mills Pty Ltd v Commonwealth (1954) 92 CLR 424 High Court (at 457):
âwhat is alleged to be an offer should have been intended to give rise, on the doing of the act, to an obligation â¦ in the absence of such an intention, actual or imputed, the alleged âofferâ cannot lead to a contract: there, indeed, in such a case no true âofferâ.â

Communication of Wenâs offer

An offer must be communicated to the offeree before it can be accepted. Graw (2002 p. 48).
Wen mailed his offer to Jo responding to her enquiry. Jo received Wen's letter and replied to it immediately. Thereâs no doubt that Wenâs offer was properly communicated in this case.

An acceptance is a final and unqualified acceptance of the terms of an offer. To make a binding contract the acceptance must exactly match the offer. The offeree or an authorised agent acting on the offeree's behalf must accept all the terms of the offer. Powell v Lee (1908) 99 LT 284.

Jo's acceptance

On March 19th Jo received Wenâs letter and responded immediately agreeing to his offer herself. Hyde v Wrench (1840) 3 Beav 334
Furthermore, Jo agreed to all terms and conditions outlined in Wen's offer and communicated her acceptance via mail. In this case, the postal rule applies. The postal rule states that the acceptance will be complete as soon as the letter is properly posted. This rule was formulated in the Adams v Lindsell (1818) 1 B & Ald 681.

I think Jo acted within the guidelines of accepted conduct that exists between traders when she responded to Wen's letter, effectively accepting his offer.

Revocation of Wen's Offer

The revocation of an offer must take place before the offer is accepted by the party to whom the offer was intended. The withdrawal of the offer is ineffective until it arrives. Payne v Cave (1789) 3 TR 148; 100 ER 502.

Just like an offer itself, a revocation of the offer must be properly communicated. The revocation can be communicated by various means. All that is required is that the offeree becomes aware that the offer has been withdrawn.
Byrne & Co. v Leon Van Tienhoven & Co (1880) 5 CPD 344
Dickinson v Dodds (1876) 2 ChD 463
Henthorn v Fraser [1892] 2 Ch 27 (at 32)
Lord Hershell:
â[a revocation] can be no effectual than the offer itself, unless brought to the mind of the person whom the offer is made.â

From the given facts we know Wen had faxed a letter to Jo revoking his offer before Jo received the letter and replied to it. Therefore, there was no offer at the time when Jo replied to Wenâs letter and hence, there was no acceptance.
It could be argued that Jo had no knowledge of Wenâs offer of withdrawal. Due to the fault in her fax machine, the letter she received was unreadable.
I think it is reasonable to assume that most businesses operate fully functional appliances. In addition, fax was an acceptable means of communication between the two parties.
In my opinion, there was no contract between Wen and Jo in this case.

Bibliography

Graw, S 2002 An Introduction to the Law of Contract, Lawbook Co, Sydney
C.O.L.I.N. Tutorial on Contract Law, ANU College of Law, viewed on 20 July 2007
http://law.anu.edu.au/colin/
Dr Robert N Moles 2006 Contract Law, Networked Knowledge, viewed on 21 July 2007
http://netk.net.au/ContractLaw.asp

or http://picccs.mine.nu/pics/assignment1.doc

Re: Discussion essay (Law)

Clive — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 14:47:41 GMT

Hi,

I've made some suggestions. This was interesting, but I'm not a lawyer.

Best wishes, Clive

======================================================================================================================

A contract may be defined as an agreement between two or more parties that is intended to be legally binding. The essential elements of a contract are: offer, acceptance, consideration (not required for contracts under seal), intention to be bound, mutuality, capacity and legality. Graw (2002 p. 34)

In my opinion, the elements of offer, acceptance and intent to be bound ~~present the main issues to this case.~~ are the major ones, so the discussion, ~~essentially,~~ will focus on these ~~three elements.~~

An agreement consists of an offer and acceptance. At least two parties are required; one of them, the offerer, makes an offer which the other, the offeree, accepts. Moreover, there should be a strong promise or intent that will become binding on the offeror as soon as it is accepted by the offeree. Graw (2002 p. 25)

The words 'offeror, offeree' are not standard. Have you found that other people use them in this kind of discussion?

Wenâs promise to sell laptops to Jo

Wen mailed a letter to Jo clearly stating and outlining ~~the~~ terms and conditions ~~of his promise~~. So, there was a promise on Wenâs part.

To distinguish an offer from a mere supply of information, see: Harvey v Facey [1893] AC 552 Privy Council

For an invitation to treat: Pharmaceutical Society (GB) v Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) Ltd [1952] 2 QB 795.

The decision was endorsed in Fisher v Bell [1961] 1 QB 394. Lord Parker (at 399):

âIt is perfectly clear that according to the ordinary law of contract the display of an article with a price on it in a shop window is merely an invitation to treat. It is in no sense an offer for sale, the acceptance of which constitutes a contract.â

Wenâs intention to honour his promise

It can be argued that Wenâs promise offering to sell the laptops to Jo was not necessarily legally binding at the time when Wen mailed his letter. However, because of the previous course of dealings between Jo and Wen, and because Wen facsimiled the verb 'fax' is widely accepted today a letter to Jo the following day to revoke his offer, and telephoned Jo on the 19th of March to confirm the cancellation of his offer, there was a presumption that the contract would be carried out as agreed.

I don't understand. Wen revoked and cancelled, yet there is a presumption the contract will be carried out? I guess I am missing the legal point here.

Australian Woollen Mills Pty Ltd v Commonwealth (1954) 92 CLR 424 High Court (at 457):

âwhat is alleged to be an offer should have been intended to give rise, on the doing of the act, to an obligation â¦ in the absence of such an intention, actual or imputed, the alleged âofferâ cannot lead to a contract: there, indeed, in such a case no true âofferâ.â

Communication of Wenâs offer

An offer must be communicated to the offeree before it can be accepted. Graw (2002, p. 48).

Wen mailed his offer to Jo responding to her enquiry. Jo ~~had~~ received and immediately replied to Wenâs letter. Thereâs no doubt ~~about~~ that Wenâs offer was properly communicated in this case.

An acceptance is a final and unqualified acceptance <<< so there is no other kind of acceptance, eg conditional? of the terms of an offer. To make a binding contract, the acceptance must exactly match the offer. The offeree or an authorised agent acting on the offeree's behalf must accept all the terms of the offer. Graw (2002, p. 67), Powell v Lee (1908) 99 LT 284 case.

Jo's acceptance

On March 19th Jo received Wenâs letter and immediately responded, agreeing to his offer herself. Hyde v Wrench (1840) 3 Beav 334

Furthermore, Jo agreed to all terms and conditions outlined in Wen's offer and communicated her acceptance via mail. In this case, the postal rule applies. The postal rule states that the acceptance will be complete as soon as the letter is properly posted. This rule was formulated in the Adams v Lindsell (1818) 1 B & Ald 681 case.

I think Jo acted within the guidelines of [...] when she responded to Wen's letter, effectively, accepting ~~Wen's~~ his offer.

Revocation of Wen's Offer

The revocation of an offer must take place before the offer is accepted by the party to whom the offer was intended. The withdrawal of the offer is ineffective until it arrives. Payne v Cave (1789) 3 TR 148; 100 ER 502 .

Just like an offer itself, a revocation of the offer must be properly communicated. The revocation can be communicated by various means. All that is required is that the offeree becomes aware of that the offer has been withdrawn. Graw (2002, p. 54),

Byrne & Co. v Leon Van Tienhoven & Co (1880) 5 CPD 344

Dickinson v Dodds (1876) 2 ChD 463

Henthorn v Fraser [1892] 2 Ch 27 (at 32)

Lord Hershell: â[a revocation] can be no more (?) effectual than the offer itself, unless brought to the mind of the person whom the offer is madeâ.

From the given facts we know Wen had facsimiled a letter to Jo revoking his offer before Jo received the letter and replied to it. Therefore, there was no offer at the time when Jo replied to Wenâs letter and hence, there was no acceptance.

It could ~~had been~~ be argued that Jo had no knowledge of Wenâs offer withdrawal. Due to the fault in her facsimile machine, the letter she received was unreadable.

I think it is reasonable to assume that most businesses operate fully functional appliances. In addition, facsimile was an acceptable means of communication between the two parties.

In my opinion, there was no contract between Wen and Jo in this case.

References

Graw, S 2002, An Introduction to the Law of Contract, Lawbook Co, Sydney

=======================================================================================================================

Discussion essay (Law)

Anonymous — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 03:22:33 GMT

Being a non-native English speaker I have been very fortunate to be presented with an opportunity to write a discussion essay on Contracts subject. This is my first essay on law subject; I don't feel confident.

I feel I have made a number of grammar errors in my writing. So, if anyone can obvious errors or even funny errors please let me know.

Your comments and suggestions will be very much appreciated.

=======================================================

In my opinion, the elements of offer, acceptance and intent to be bound present the main issues to this case. Therefore, the discussion, essentially, will be on these three elements.

An agreement consists of an offer and acceptance. At least two parties are required; one of them, the offeror, makes an offer which the other, the offeree, accepts. Moreover, there should be a strong promise or intent that will become binding on the offeror as soon as it is accepted by the offeree. Graw (2002 p. 25)

Wenâs promise to sell laptops to Jo

Wen mailed a letter to Jo clearly stating and outlining the terms and conditions of his promise. So, there was a promise on Wenâs part.

To distinguish an offer from a mere supply of information, see: Harvey v Facey [1893] AC 552 Privy Council

For an invitation to treat: Pharmaceutical Society (GB) v Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) Ltd [1952] 2 QB 795.

The decision was endorsed in Fisher v Bell [1961] 1 QB 394. Lord Parker (at 399):

"It is perfectly clear that according to the ordinary law of contract the display of an article with a price on it in a shop window is merely an invitation to treat. It is in no sense an offer for sale, the acceptance of which constitutes a contract."

Wenâs intention to honour his promise

It can be argued that Wenâs promise offering to sell the laptops to Jo was not necessarily legally binding at the time when Wen mailed his letter. However, because of the previous course of dealings between Jo and Wen, and because Wen facsimiled a letter to Jo the following day to revoke his offer, and telephoned Jo on the 19th of March to confirm the cancellation of his offer, there was a presumption that the contract would be carried out as agreed.

Australian Woollen Mills Pty Ltd v Commonwealth (1954) 92 CLR 424 High Court (at 457):

"what is alleged to be an offer should have been intended to give rise, on the doing of the act, to an obligation â¦ in the absence of such an intention, actual or imputed, the alleged âofferâ cannot lead to a contract: there, indeed, in such a case no true âofferâ."

Communication of Wenâs offer

An offer must be communicated to the offeree before it can be accepted. Graw (2002, p. 48).

Wen mailed his offer to Jo responding to her enquiry. Jo had received and immediately replied to Wenâs letter. Thereâs no doubt about Wenâs offer was properly communicated in this case.

An acceptance is a final and unqualified acceptance of the terms of an offer. To make a binding contract the acceptance must exactly match the offer. The offeree or an authorised agent acting on offeree's behalf must accept all the terms of the offer. Graw (2002, p. 67), Powell v Lee (1908) 99 LT 284 case.

Jo's acceptance

On March 19th Jo received Wenâs letter and immediately responded agreeing to his offer herself. Hyde v Wrench (1840) 3 Beav 334

I think Jo acted within the guidelines of [...] when she responed to Wen's letter. Effectively, accepting Wen's offer.

Revocation of Wen's Offer

The revocation of an offer must take place before the offer is accepted by the party to whom the offer was intended. The withdrawal of the offer is ineffective until it arrives. Payne v Cave (1789) 3 TR 148; 100 ER 502 .

Byrne & Co. v Leon Van Tienhoven & Co (1880) 5 CPD 344

Dickinson v Dodds (1876) 2 ChD 463

Henthorn v Fraser [1892] 2 Ch 27 (at 32)

Lord Hershell: "[a revocation] can be no effectual than the offer itself, unless brought to the mind of the person whom the offer is made".

It could had been argued that Jo had no knowledge of Wenâs offer withdrawl. Due to the fault in her facsimile machine the letter she received was unreadable.

I think it is reasonable to assume that most businesses operate fully functional appliances. In addition, facsimile was an acceptable means of communication between the two parties.

In my opinion, there was no contract between Wen and Jo in this case.

References

Graw, S 2002, An Introduction to the Law of Contract, Lawbook Co, Sydney

========================================================e's behalf must accept all the terms of the offer. Graw (2002, p. 67), Powell v Lee (1908) 99 LT 284 case.

Jo's acceptance

On March 19th Jo received Wenâs letter and immediately responded agreeing to his offer herself. Hyde v Wrench (1840) 3 Beav 334

I think Jo acted within the guidelines of [...] when she responed to Wen's letter. Effectively, accepting Wen's offer.

Revocation of Wen's Offer

Byrne & Co. v Leon Van Tienhoven & Co (1880) 5 CPD 344

Dickinson v Dodds (1876) 2 ChD 463

Henthorn v Fraser [1892] 2 Ch 27 (at 32)

Lord Hershell: "[a revocation] can be no effectual than the offer itself, unless brought to the mind of the person whom the offer is made".

It could had been argued that Jo had no knowledge of Wenâs offer withdrawl. Due to the fault in her facsimile machine the letter she received was unreadable.

I think it is reasonable to assume that most businesses operate fully functional appliances. In addition, facsimile was an acceptable means of communication between the two parties.

In my opinion, there was no contract between Wen and Jo in this case.

References

Graw, S 2002, An Introduction to the Law of Contract, Lawbook Co, Sydney

========================================================

Re: Islam, is the Religion of Peace

Rita_malicia — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 01:04:10 GMT

dear Dew ,

well i admit that i didnt read all your posts , but i red some, however, concerning the Article "A" or "THE" i meant that for some people his or her religion can be the best or the most peaceful that's why i stated that he is free to use the article he wants, besides all this i dont know why some people have a limited way of thinking and follow all what they hear and think that they understood everything in every religion, pardon me but if you think that somone who loves his religion and admires it is a " brain washed"!!! iam sorry for the word but i really think that it's a silly word especially if it is not used in it's context, there are some^people who are in every religion there is this kind of things but i think you should know when to use it, moreover be logic please if someone declare the war against you would he come and take your territory or you will do so!!! of course he will, so who is the coloniser? also who is defending teh teritorries!! only civil people , so do you think that in a war it's civil people who declare the war?? it's children who hold those small stones wants the war?? it's them whom you called the Islamic forces who are willing for this war??? come on.!!

But above all this iam personnaly against the war between any different religions, for me each one is free to follow the path he started and it's the right of everyone.

concerning your invitation well, for me it would be an orange Juice and that would be so intersting as you said to sit among people regardless of our religions.

Please Help Me to Resolve the Invitation Letter For Professor.

Rredika — Wed, 11 Jul 2007 06:42:27 GMT

Dear Professor ________

I am Rredika, the student whom involve in _________________ Research Group at University __________
Our group very interesting in image processing and development an application of handwritten character recognition.
Moreover, in our Faculty (Information Science and Technology) or in University, many student have involves and interests in Artificial Intelligent Research Domain.

I find your name and the book has written by you : "Markov Models .....", and i have found your resume in http:/zzzzzzz/ .
We are very interesting to invite you for give us some sort course in Artificial Intelligent Domain, especially in Markov Models Theoretical concepts and Application.
Approximate, we have about 40 students (more or less) will joins as an audiences for this sort course. We plan the sort course is about 2 days and will be held within July or August 2007

Our objective for this sort course are : can explains us the Markov Models very introductory and understandable by technical and non technical student (theoretical concepts of Markov models).
Moreover, this course can inform us, how to use the Markov Algorithm and explain us the detail of Markov Algorithm Programming line by line, and explain us each functionality of the Markov Algorithms, and also demonstrate us the simple application which give a picture about how the Markov Model resolve the simple problem (learning and testing).
The sort course will be held at University ______ in City, Country.

Hopefully.., we can deal with good cooperation, perhaps you can response us ASAP about your confirmation to fulfill our invitation and discuss about your free time and expected cost.

Thank you in advance,
Best Regards

Rredika

Re: who for?

Marius Hancu — Tue, 26 Jun 2007 12:42:59 GMT

From the grammarians at another forum:

----
Of course, "From whom" is formal, while "who from" is informal and conversational.

I can imagine this:

A: We got a wedding invitation today?
B: Oh, from whom?
A: Those people we met last year on the cruise.

Even though "from whom" is a little formal here, and "who from" would work equally well and my guess is more frequently, "from whom" is also used, and does not sound at all out of place.

Rachel

http://thegrammarexchange.infopop.cc/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/340600179/m/8691027244
-------

Search results for 'tag:Whom tag:Invitations' matching tags 'Whom' and 'Invitations'

Re: creams and detergents

Mr. Miclawer,

Nouns only countable nouns can be either singular or plural. ... He had some ice cream on his face. He had an ice cream. mass. countable ...www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/tta/wc/nouns.htm - 21k - Cached - Similar pages

http://au.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080425090142AAom2ui

Answers (4)

e-mail invitation to banquet

Re: i just want to help u

Re: Discussion essay (Law)

Re: Discussion essay (Law)

Re: Discussion essay (Law)

Discussion essay (Law)

Re: Islam, is the Religion of Peace

Please Help Me to Resolve the Invitation Letter For Professor.

Re: who for?

Nouns only countable nouns can be either singular or plural. ... He had some ice cream on
his face. He had an ice cream. mass. countable ...
www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/tta/wc/nouns.htm - 21k - Cached - Similar pages