This is an issue about certainty. The terms certainty is essential to
constitute a valid contract, in other words, an agreement that entered into
between the parties must be clear and certain, that is it should not involve
any elements that are considered unduly vague, indefinite, obviously incomplete
as well as uncertain. For instance, Mr X agrees to sell five tonnes of tea to
Mr Y without specifying what kind or quality they are, such agreement void on
the grounds of uncertainty under the Section 30 of Contracts Act 1950.
In the case
of Scammell v Ouston (1941), Ouston agreed to buy a van from Scammell on “hire
purchase terms” for two years, however before the hire purchase terms had been
agreed, Scammell refused to proceed with that sale. This in turn make Scammell
sued Ouston for breaching a contract, however Scammell claimed that such hire-purchase
agreement cannot be enforced because the phrase ‘on hire purchase terms’ were too
vague and it is too uncertain. Since the term hire purchase is too
vague and obscure to be given any precise or definite meaning, hence the court
held that there was no enforceable contract existed between Scammell and Ouston (Elliott, 2009, p. 53).
Similarly, in Karuppan
Chetty v Suah Thian (1916), the parties agreed upon the granting to lease out
the land for RM35 for a month as long as he likes. Since the duration of this lease agreement is not certain and defined,
hence the requirement of certainty had not been satisfied. The court then held
the agreement to be void due to a clear lack of uncertainty.
In the view of this question, the office building was leased at a price of RM
3,000.00 per month ‘for as long as the lessee wishes” does not met the requirement
of certainty, since the duration which known as one of the most significant
term of the lease has not been clearly stated and therefore it is too vague to
binding a contract. In conclusion, there is no agreement exist between the
parties that lease the office building due to uncertainty is appear in such agreement.
Based on the Section 30 of Contracts Act 1950, this contract is void.