Skip to content

CMA Foundation · Fundamentals of Business Laws and Business Communication · Performance of Contracts

Kiran and Lata are joint promisees under a contract to receive 50 machine parts from Dev Engineering. Dev makes a proper offer of delivery to Kiran alone at the agreed place and time, satisfying all conditions of Section 38. Kiran refuses to accept, and Lata later claims Dev never offered to her. What is the legal position?

The offer made to Kiran is treated as an offer to both joint promisees. Section 38 says an offer to one of several joint promisees has the same legal consequences as an offer to all, so Dev is not responsible for non-performance after Kiran's refusal.

  1. AThe offer to Kiran has the same legal consequences as an offer to both, so Dev is not responsible for non-performanceCorrect
  2. BThe offer is ineffective unless made separately to Lata as well
  3. CThe offer is effective only for Kiran's share and Dev stays liable for Lata's share
  4. DThe offer is effective only if Lata consented to it beforehand

Explanation

Section 38 provides that an offer to one of several joint promisees has the same legal consequences as an offer to all of them. Since the offer met the conditions, Dev is not responsible for non-performance. Splitting the shares or needing consent has no basis in the section.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Performance of Contracts shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Performance of ContractsFree diagnostic mock

More Performance of Contracts questions