Inspector Sniff, offered a reward to anyone who would assist in giving information that could lead to the arrest and subsequent conviction of Rastara, a “most wanted carjacker” in the city. The reward of Kshs 100,000 was advertised in the local dailies.
Ole Ndume who did not know of the reward volunteered information to inspector
Sniff and Rastara was arrested and convicted. However inspector Sniff did not give Ole
Ndume the reward. It is now three months since the arrest and Ole Ndume has learnt of the reward. He seeks your legal advice on whether he can successfully claim the reward.
Advice Ole Ndume
SUGGESTED ANSWER
Answering a problem question demands three things:
1. The principle of law at issues i.e. what legal rule is being tested?
2. What is the factual situation and what does it illustrate and what is our advice?
3. What is the legal justification of the advice?
• In the question above, the problem is based on acceptance of offers. The specific rule of acceptance is that the offeree must have been aware of and intended to accept the offer.
• This rule is based on the logic that a person cannot accept an offer whose existence he was unaware of.
• In this case Inspector Sniff made an offer for Kshs 100,000 to any person who gave information leading to the arrest and conviction of Rastara. Ole Ndume gave the information while unaware of the offer and was therefore not accepting the offer. He cannot therefore claim the reward since there is no agreement between him and the inspector. My advice to Ole Ndume is that he has no claim against
inspector Sniff.
• My advise is based on the decision in Crown V Clarke whose facts were substantially similar to those in this case. In this case Clarke was aware of the offer but gave the information for a different purpose, he was therefore not accepting the offer and was not entitle to the reward.