Hazirah can legally claim the remaining balance of Intan's debt because there was no acceptance of the offer from Johan that the part-payment should serve as full settlement.
<h3>What is the law of contract?</h3>
The law of contract deals with the enforcement of promises when certain elements are present. These contract elements include offer, acceptance, consideration, and intention.
Intan should remember that a valid and enforceable contract has conditions. We cannot claim there is an implied acceptance of Johan's offer. Johan cannot modify the contract terms between Intan and Hazirah because he was not a party to the contract.
Lastly, Johan did not offer any consideration for Hazirah to forfeit the balance of RM5,000. And Hazirah remained silent during Johan's informal negotiations without communicating her acceptance.
Thus, there was <u>no </u><u>contract</u><u> </u>between Johan and Hazirah, and Intan should do well to repay the balance.
Learn more about the elements of a contract at brainly.com/question/8116487
D makes more sense so try D
First, the case must be appealled to even make it to the SCOTUS. However, probably the most important condition is that a given case must pose a question about the constitution.
Answer:
Supreme Court
Explanation:
The Constitution established the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction to provide a tribunal of the highest stature for disputes.
Explanation:
In Reynolds v. Sims (1964), the Supreme Court ruled that the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment requires that the legislative districts across states be equal in population
