1

2

3

Peter is going through a mid-life crisis and this prompts him to try to buy his "dream" car: a green Holden Torana owned by his former boss, Michael. Peter sends the following email to Michael: "do you still have the epic Torana? If so, I am prepared to offer you $100,000; you will no doubt be aware that this is way over the car's market value. But my offer will remain open for only three weeks". Michael, on the basis of this offer, buys his two twin children a car each. Before the three weeks expired, but after Michael had bought cars for his children, Peter advises Michael that he is withdrawing his offer as his wife is threatening to leave him if he goes ahead with the purchase of the Torana. Michael is upset and tells Peter that since the three weeks have not yet passed, Peter's $100,000 offer still stands. Is Peter required to proceed with the purchase of Michael's Torana for $100,000, according to the law of contract? Please refer to any relevant legal cases and/or legislation to support your arguments, and ensure that you fully explain your answer. Do not discuss the Australian Consumer Law for the purposes of answering this question. Type your answer in the box below. Peter owns a small store where he sells vinyl records. He decided to promote the business by advertising a "special offer" in the local newspaper. The advertisement he placed in the local newspaper states that, on the production by the customer of the advertisement, the customer wil be entitled to purchase "rare" vinyl records by famous Opera singer, Luciano Pavarotti, for only \$9 each for one week only. This price was incorrect due to a mistake Peter's assistant made in the email he sent to the relevant newspaper. The special price that Peter wished to advertise was instead $99. The day after the advertisement is published, forty customers arrive at Peter's shop producing the advertisement and offering to pay $9 for each of the records in question. Is Peter required to sell these records to the forty customers, for $9 each, according to the law of contract? Please refer to any relevant legal cases and/or legislation to support your arguments, and ensure you fully explain your answer. Do not discuss the Australian Consumer Law for the purposes of answering this question. Type your answer in the box below Following his unsuccessful attempt to buy the Torana, Peter decides to buy a new business: a newsagency. He goes to see Carmel, the owner of the local newsagency. They swap email addresses, and tell each other that they will communicate by email (using those addresses) to negotiate the sale. On 5 June 2022, Peter emails Carmel, offering $100,000 to buy her newsagency. On 6 June 2022 , she replies stating that she would only sell it for $150,000. Few minutes after this email is sent by Carmel, Peter is rushed to hospital, as a result of catching COVID-19. He stays in hospital for 3 days. During his time in hospital, Peter has no access to his emails. When he is discharged from hospital, he sees Carmel's email mentioned above as well as another email Carmel sent him on 7 June 2022 in which she indicated that she changed her mind and was now willing to sell her business to Peter for $100,000. At this point in time, have Peter and Carmel formed a valid agreement for the sale of Carmel's newsagency, according to the law of contract? Please refer to any relevant legal cases and/or legislation to support your arguments, and ensure that you fully explain your answer. Type your answer in the box below