This is a matter pertaining to the formation of a valid agreement and the preliminary

agreement to the main offer. This requires a determination of whether there is a valid contract
of sale.
Option contract

 Option conract is a contract in its own right, meaning that there must be a valif offer
and acceptance in terms of the option contract
 Venter v Birchholtz and Hirchowitz v Moolman said that the option contract has to
comply with the formalities in terms of the main offer.
 However, Kretzman v Kretzman disputes this position and says that an option contract
will be valid without complying with the formalities of the main offer (e.g writing).
This was supported by Makone v Tassos where the court held that a verbal pre-
emption contract for the sale of land is valid because the pre-emption contract does
not sell the thing (subject matter), it simply creates a certain right.
o Therefore, because pre-emption and option contracts both don’t sell the
subject matter, the reasoning in Makone v Tassos can be applied to option
contracts.
 Option contract keeps the main offer open for the duration of the option contract
 The option contract remains open for a prescribed period (in this case until 01
November where it will lapse if the main offer is not concluded)
This requires us to determine whether there was a valid offer in order to determine whether
the option contract was also valid and binding, and thus whether the pupated forms of
acceptance by Bonita managed to conclude a valid option.

Main Offer
To establish whether there was a valid offer, the following requirements have to be satisfies.
1. The offer must be made in a prescribed form (Wessels v Swart)
 This pertains to any self-imposed formalities and statutory formalities that the offer
must abide by.
o In this instance the offer is in the form of an advertisement there are no listed
formalities to be followed
2. The offer must be made with the necessary animus contrahendi
 Kgopana v Matla -
 Geldbuild Contractors -- A quote must be made with the express or implied intention
that the offeror would be bound to the terms of the offer upon mere acceptance.
 Pitout v Northern Cape Livestock – Look at objective and subjective factors to
determine animus.
In the present scenario, the advertisement identifies the subject matter and the price of the
car is specified, furthermore, we can infer from Bonita engagement with him that
Abdullah provided his details and made it possible for interested parties to contact him. If
 we look at the objective factors, Abdullah took the time to show Bonita the car and he
granted her an option to purchase the car, which shows that he was willing to be bound.
Therefore the advertisement was made with animus.

3. The offer must be complete, certain and ascertainable

 Geldbuild Contrcactors v Rarewoods simplifies this to mean that the object of sale
must be clearly identified, and the price must stipulated or that it must be objectively
determinable through some formulae.
 In this case, the only information that is tendered in terms of the car is that it a Jaguar
motor car, there are no further stipulation as to the model of the car the colour or the
kilometers that are on the car, these are things that are considered to be the Naturalia
in a contract of sale for a motor vehicle. Although the price is clearly described, I am
inclined to argue that the advertisement was not clear, certain and ascertainable.

4. The offer must be communicated to the offeror

 Offers may be made to individuals, a group or class or persons or to the public at
large. However, in the case of advertisements, there are certain factors which indicate
that such an advertisement is merely an invitation to do business, these include the
fact that the offeror might want to retain the final say and they may wish who they
want to contract with.
 The court in Crawley in applying the common law position held that an
advertisement is merely and invitation to do business and not an offer.
 However, the court in Carlil v Carbolic Smoke Ball substantiated this position by
stipulating the exception, which therefore say that an advertisement is merely an an
invitation to do business, however it may constitute an offer where the advertisement
is complete, certain and its made with the necessary animus contrahendi.
 The statutory position being section 30 of the CPA says that an Advertisement will
constitute a valid offer where it states a limitation on the number of goods available,
in this scenario, section 30 thus applies because there is a tact term (or understanding )
from the advertisement that they are only advertising one car (hence placing a
limitation on goods available).
Therefore, in this instance, the advertisement was communicated to the offeree and it
amounted to a valid offer.

The offer made by Abdullah in the newspaper does not constitute a valid offer because, it
fails to satisfy the requirement of complete, certain and ascertainable because the offer in the
newspaper does not stipulate all the Naturalia that is required in a contract of sale for a
vehicle.
The general rule with option contracts is that the option contract will also be invalid and will
lapse where the main offer is deemed to be invalid for some reason. Therefore, if there was
no valid offer, and the option as such was also invalid, this means that despite the fact that the
option contract lapsed, there was no valid offer for Belinda to make a valid acceptance to.
Therefore, Bonita must be advised that there was no valid contract of sale for the car between
her and Abdullah.

However, should I be wrong in my analysis in that the correct position is that there is a valid
offer, the next step is to determine whether the option contract had lapsed or not and whether
Bonita managed to accept the offer timeously thus creating a legally binding contract between
her and Abdullah.
Option contract

 There was a valid offer an acceptance in terms of the option contract

 The offeror for the optin is Bonita and the offeree is Abdullah.

Offer in terms of option

1. Made with animus
a. The is intention on Bonitas side to enter into a legally binding contract
with Abdullah
b. Looking at the objective and subjective factors, the fact that Bonita
requests the option herself and the fact that she understands that the option
upon acceptance by Abdullah will allow her time to think about the initial
offer shows sufficient animus.

2. Made in Prescribed form (Wessels v Swart

a. Contract can be made in an form save for where the parties themselves or
the law prescribes formalities to be abide by.
b. Because Kretzman v Kretzman said that an option is valid without
complying with the formalities of the main offer, and because we can
arguably apply the reasoning in Makone v Tassos to option contracts, then
a verbal option offer is valid.
3. Complete, Certain and Acsertainable (Geldbuild Contarctors v Rarewood)
a. The option contract is complete, certain and ascertainable be it identifies
the object of sale, the naturalia and essential of the terms of a contract of
sale of a motor vehicle.
4. Commnicated to the offeree
a. This is not an issue in this case because the party’s were in each other’s
presence Bonita’s request for that they have an option contract is
instantaneously communicated to Abdullah.
Acceptance in terms of the Offer:
For the acceptance of an offer to be valid and thus create legally binding obligations, the offer
has to satisfy the following requirements:
1. Animus Contrahendi ( Bloom v American Swiss )
 Bloom v American Swiss – the acceptance must be a conscious response to the offer
2. The offer must be accepted by the personto whom it was made
 Levin v Drieprok Properties (contract made to a specific person can only be made to
that person)
 Belinda communicated the offer to create an option to Abdullah and Abdullah was the
one who signed the document which says that Abdullah is granting Belinda the option
contract.
3. The Acceptance must correspond directly to the terms of the offer
 JRM Furnisher Holdings says that the acceptance must be a complete and unequivocal
assent to the terms of the contract and must not amend any terms of the offer
o Three exception to this are-:
1. Where a party merely asks for clarification
2. Where the person accepts the offer and they try to see if the offeror would
induldge them in negotiating some of the terms.
 Partial acceptance is not allowed
 Where a party accepts the offer but immediately re-negotiates the essential terms, this
amounts to a counteroffer. A counteroffer amounts to a rejection of the contract.
 In this scenario, Abdullah’s offer satisfies this requirement because the terms outlined
in his written acceptance coincide directly with the terms of the option contract that
Bonita had requested.
4. Acceptance must be made in prescribed form

 A to Z Bazaars says that where the offeror uses a particular mode of

communication with the offeree, then they tacitly prescribe acceptance in that
manner
 Driftwood Properties v McKlean further says that where an offeror prescribes a
particular mode of acceptance, then the acceptance will only be valid if made in
such a manner.
5. Acceptance to be made before the offer prescribes