Assignment task:
This case involves the question of whether an interspousal contract was formed between Deanna Stadnyk, the petitioner, and Ted Dash, the respondent, who lived together for 10 years prior to separating. On July 5, 2007, Dash's lawyer received a proposal for settlement, which requested a response to the proposal within 10 days. Dash was out of the province at the time, and some time passed before his lawyer was able to obtain instructions. Dash's lawyer replied on August 15, 2007 with an acceptance of the proposal, but Stadnyk's lawyer was on summer vacation, so the petitioner was not made aware of the correspondence of August 15 until early September. In the intervening weeks, Stadnyk had reconsidered the offer made on July 5 and instructed her lawyer to revoke it. The position of Dash, the respondent, was that an agreement had been reached by virtue of his lawyer's letter sent August 15, accepting the offer proposed by Stadnyk; therefore, revocation was not an option available to the Stadnyk. For Stadnyk's part, she contended that either Dash's acceptance was not made within the time prescribed for the offer or that, alternatively, the offer was revoked. Regardless, Stadnyk submitted that no settlement agreement was achieved. Source: Stadnyk v. Dash, 2007 SKQB 443
What is the main issue in the case of Stadnyk v. Dash? The main issue is whether an interspousal contract was formed between Deanna Stadnyk and Ted Dash, who lived together for 10 years prior to separating, and if a settlement agreement was achieved in response to the proposal for settlement sent to Dash's lawyer on July 5, 2007.
According to the text, for how long is an offer valid?
The text does not provide information on how long an offer is valid.
Stadnyk v. Dash According to the text, for how long is an offer valid?
The text does not explicitly state how long an offer is valid for, but it does mention that the proposal for settlement requested a response within 10 days.
According to the text, for how long is an offer valid?