Question

Hattie was an elderly widow who lived in Prince George. She owned a cabin on Vancouver Island. Percy, who lived in Saanich, British Columbia, was interested in purchasing the cabin and land owned by Hattie. On September 10, he wrote a letter to Hattie in which he offered to purchase the cabin and land for $125,000. Hattie received the letter on September 15, and immediately faxed a letter to Percy offering to sell the cabin and land to him for $150,000. Percy did not respond to the fax immediately, but on a business trip to Prince George on September 22, he spoke to Hattie about the cabin in an effort to determine if Hattie might be willing to reduce the price. In the past Hattie had been a good real estate agent and she enjoyed the negotiation process. Hattie replied that her price was "firm" at $150,000.

When Percy returned to Saanich, he sent a letter to Hattie purporting to accept her offer to sell the cabin and land at $150,000 subject to him obtaining a mortgage of not less than $125,000 at an interest rate of not more than 8% by October 5. The letter was posted at 11:40 a.m. on September 23, but through a delay in the mail, was not delivered to Hattie in Prince George until 4:20 p.m. on September 28.

         

In the meantime on September 26, Sneaky, Hattie's nephew, was able to convince Hattie to sell the property to him for $75,000.00. Sneaky was a sophisticated business man with a charming personality. He told her that if she sold him the property he would ensure that he would invite all the nieces and nephews down for yearly family gatherings. Hattie was touched by his family concern and she transferred the property to Sneaky on September 27 in exchange for $75,000.00.

Sneaky also had a dark side to him. He had planned to immediately start growing unlicensed cannabis (ie. illegal) on it and he was arrested two months later for cultivating it illegally. When the nieces and nephews questioned him he told them that he paid good value for the property and that they should drop dead.

Describe the legal positions of the parties.  

Answer 1

The legal position of the parties

1. Percy

As Percy offered Hattie to purchase her land and cabin at $125000, Hattie made a counteroffer to sell those at $150000. Again Percy made a counteroffer that is a qualified one, stating that, obtaining a mortgage of not less than $125000 and with an interest rate of not more than 8% by October 5.

A counteroffer means the original offer to be rejected and to be replaced with another one. The counteroffer gives the original offeror three options:

1. Accepting the counteroffer

2. Rejecting the counteroffer

3. Making another offer

There would be no binding contract between the parties who are involved until one accepts the offer of another person. As in this case, the counteroffer was not accepted by Hattie, so it would not lead to a valid enforceable contract, as it lacks the valid offer backed by a valid acceptance and certainty of the agreement.

2. Sneaky

He planned to grow unlicensed cannabis, which is illegal in Prince George and was arrested two months later for the same. The following would lead to a criminal charge-

1 A person 18 years old or more, if distributes cannabis to a minor, they can face up to 14 years of imprisonment.

2. Possessing a budding in public can move up to four plants in a public place.

3. Selling cannabis without a license.

4. If illicit cannabis is sold, produced, or distributed from a person that was banned from doing so. If someone grows more than four plants at home, that would be considered as illicit cannabis.

In this case, Sneaky would be liable to criminal proceedings according to common law.

Regarding the comment made by Sneaky, that "they should drop dead", it questions whether the words uttered are in the form of a threat or violence. Many often used to use this word ' drop dead. Take one example, if a driver shouts by throwing this word whose car we had just cut in front of on the freeway, the voice and intensity would be the same that of a threatening, but that does not amount to threat in law. In this case as well, the interpretation of the same would not amount to any legal threat.

3. Hattie

As Hattie has already transferred the property as on the 27th of September, so she would not be liable for any acts conducted by Sneaky, if the fact was unknown to her regarding the illegal cultivation of the unlicensed cannabis.