A). Lynne had willingly entered into a contract with Kirk to finish the deck and gardening work. Kirk was to charge her the going rate for labour on an hourly basis in addition to the material costs. Assuming that there was a contract that was signed by both for a consideration, Lynne had a responsibility to pay Kirk according to the current labour rate and materials. If Lynne was to revoke the order before giving it to her uncle Andrew, she should have asked Kirk to not start the work at all. Thus, as she did showed lack of responsibility in informing Kirk about the revoking of the order, Kirk has the right to sue Lynne and recover the pending $700 dollar that was held up by Lynne.
B). Andrew offered himself to do the gardening and was not called by Lynne. After hearing the willingness from Andrew, Lynne agreed to give him the job and also promised to offer a $200 gift voucher. Now, here is a promissory made to Andrew, irrespective of the quality of work done which was not part of their verbal conversation. They did not legally bind themselves by a contract, but they had a verbal agreement for some consideration. However, in this case, Andrew did not agree for any consideration for the work that he will do for Lynne, and the $200 gift voucher was a willing commitment from Lynne, without ever entering into a consideration for the work. So Andrew, though entitled to receive the $200 gift voucher as promised by Lynne, he is not entitled to take proceeding towards her for the non-payment of the gift voucher, as it was offered by Lynne herself and was not demanded by Andrew or a part of a verbal commitment or agreement by Andrew. Andrew is not entitled for the $200 gift voucher, as it was without commitment and being offered by her delightedness.