Is the wife bound by the indemnity clause she originally proposed?

We are now transitioning from the subject of tort law to contract law.
For this week’s discussion forum, answer Question #3 in the Cases and Discussion Questions at the end of Chapter 6 in your textbook. The case is: Yin v. Lui, CanLII (BC CA).(In the Pic document)
The main question to answer about the case is:
Is the wife bound by the indemnity clause she originally proposed? Why or why not? For this case, research what the BC Supreme Court outcome was and then what the Court of Appeal found.
This case raises a few important questions such as: 1) Does a non-response (silence) constitute acceptance of an offer? Under what circumstances might silence be accepted? 2) What is the effect of a counter-offer? What did the judges say about the husband’s counter-offer? 3) In the end, what was the only clause regarding indemnity that could be accepted in this case? 4) With regard to the indemnity clause, what would have been an acceptable sequence of events that would have ultimately kept this case out of the courts?
Your task for this discussion forum is to answer the question posed in the textbook AS WELL AS questions 1, 2, 3, and 4 above. Note: in order to receive full marks for this discussion forum, you must quote directly from the case (i.e. you must read the full case and not just rely on the case summary).
A link to the case can be found here:
https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2015/2015canlii98223/2015canlii98223.html?autocompleteStr=yin%20v.%20liu&autocompletePos=3