ISSUES

Whether Validity of Maganga’s acceptance of Mamba’s offer

Whether Breach of contract by Mamba

Whether Maganga’s chances of success in the lawsuit

LAW APPLICABLE

The law of contract act

ARGUMENT

The first issue to consider is the validity of Maganga’s acceptance. Maganga initially proposed to buy the
house for Tshs. 76 million, which can be seen as a counter-offer rather than an acceptance of Mamba’s
original offer for Tshs. 100 million. However, Mamba responded with a new offer to sell for Tshs. 87
million, giving Maganga the option to accept within four days via email.

The main issues in this scenario revolve around the validity of Maganga’s acceptance of Mamba’s offer
and whether Maganga can succeed in a lawsuit against Mamba for breach of contract.

In this case, Mamba made an initial offer to sell his house for Tshs. 100 million. When Maganga
proposed to buy it for Tshs. 76 million, this constituted a counter-offer rather than an acceptance of
Mamba’s original offer. Therefore, Mamba’s subsequent response offering to sell the house for Tshs. 87
million can be seen as a new offer.

Furthermore, Mamba specified that if Maganga wished to buy the house at this price, he should reply
via email within four days. This requirement indicates that Mamba intended to make email
communication a condition for acceptance of his offer.

When Maganga failed to respond via email within the stipulated time frame but sent a letter via post on
the fifth day accepting the offer, it raises questions about whether this form of communication met the
conditions set by Mamba for acceptance.
Under the “postal rule” in contract law, an acceptance is generally effective upon posting, regardless of
when it is received by the offeror. However, in this case, Mamba had explicitly stated that acceptance
should be communicated via email within four days. As such, Maganga’s acceptance through postal mail
did not meet the specified mode of communication and time frame set by Mamba.

Given these circumstances, it can be argued that there was no valid acceptance of Mamba’s offer by
Maganga due to non-compliance with the specified mode and timing of communication.

As for whether Maganga can succeed in a lawsuit against Mamba for breach of contract, it appears
unlikely based on the analysis above. Since there was no valid acceptance of Mamba’s offer by
Maganga, no binding contract was formed between them. Therefore, Maganga may not have grounds to
succeed in a lawsuit for breach of contract.

Maganga did not reply via email within the specified time frame but sent a letter accepting the offer on
the fifth day. According to the postal rule, acceptance by post takes effect when the letter is posted,
regardless of when it is received by the offeror. Therefore, Maganga’s acceptance is valid and binding
from the moment he posted the letter.

Moving on to the second issue, Mamba sold the house to Rahma on the sixth day after not receiving any
email from Maganga within four days. This raises concerns about whether Mamba breached his contract
with Maganga.

Mamba’s new offer of Tshs. 87 million was conditional upon Maganga replying via email within four
days. Since Maganga did not fulfill this condition, Mamba was not obligated to keep the offer open and
was free to sell the house to someone else. Therefore, Mamba did not breach the contract with
Maganga by selling the house to Rahma.

Considering the third issue, Maganga’s chances of success in the lawsuit depend on whether there was a
valid contract between him and Mamba. As discussed above, Maganga’s acceptance of Mamba’s offer
was valid under the postal rule. However, since Mamba’s offer was conditional upon an email response
within four days, Maganga failed to comply with that condition.