Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

A Level Law > Contract Law > Flashcards

Contract Law Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
MBE flashcards MPRE flashcards Civil Procedure 1L flashcards
1
Q

Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking

A

an offer can be through notice or machine.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Gibson v Manchester

A

an offer must be in definite terms.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Bilateral Contract

A

Made by the offeror in return for a promise from the offeree.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Unilateral Contract

A

Made by the offeror in exchange for an act from the offeree with no obligation for the offeree to act.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball

A

a rewards poster can be a unilateral contract.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Patridge v Crittenden

A

advertisements are invitations to treat.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Fisher v Bell

A

goods in a window are invitations, and are not legally binding.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Boots Chemist

A

the purchaser is the offeror when presenting goods at a checkout.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

British Car Auctions v Wright

A

lots at an auction are invitations to treat,

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Harvey v Facey

A

requests for more information is not an offer, e.g. asking the price or ways to pay.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Taylor v Laird

A

offers must be communicated, the offeree must know it exists.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Stevenson v Mclean

A

an offer can have a specified time limit.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Rejection

A

An offer cannot be accepted after rejection.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Hyde v Wrench

A

a counter offer is rejection for the previous offer, the original is no longer valid.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Lapse of time

A

After the offer has expired, it doesn’t exist.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Ramsgate Hotel v Montefiore

A

acceptance must be in a reasonable time.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Death

A

If an offeree dies, the offer ends.
If an offeror dies the offer is open until the offeree learns of their death.
If it is for a service, it can’t be accepted if either dies.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Revocation

A

taking the offer back

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Routledge

A

revocation can be any time prior to acceptance.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Byrne

A

rev must be communicated to be effective.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Dickinson v Dodds

A

revocation can be made by a reliable third party.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Brimnes

A

revocation is subject to usual business hours.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Acceptance

A

After acceptance, there is an agreement.

It must be positive, unequivocal and communicated.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Felthouse

A

acceptance cannot be by silence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Yates

A

when particular forms are required then, unless no other will suffice, it must be no less advantageous.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

Postal Rules

A

Adams v Lindsell:
When the post is the usual way to communicate.
Letters must: be properly addressed and stamped with concrete proof of postage.
When fulfilled, acceptance has occurred after postage.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

Enfores v Miles Far East

A

postal rules do not apply to instantaneous methods of communication.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

Brinkibon v Stahag Stahl

A

instant communication takes effect when it is received, subject to business practices.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co - acceptance

A

acceptance can be by conduct.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

Reveille v Anotech International

A

performance without written acceptance will be acceptance.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

Intention to create legal relations

A

There must be intention to create legal relations to make a contract legally binding and enforceable.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

domestic or social

A

Jones v Padayatton: no intent for legal relations.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

Balfour v Balfour

Merritt v Merritt

A

no intent between those who are married; but there is if made after the divorce

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

Simpkins v Pays

Parker v Clarke

A

The circumstances will be assessed.

If one party has given up their security, there is intent to create legal relations.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

business agreements

A

Esso v CCE: there is intent that can be rebutted.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q

McGowan v Radio Buxton

A

promotional offers have intent e.g. competitions

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
37
Q

Kleinwort

A

intent can be rebutted when the contract is not clear enough to amount to a specific promise.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
38
Q

ambiguous circumstance

Sadler v Reynolds

A

halfway house: business and domestic

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
39
Q

consideration

A

What is exchanged (loss/benefit) in a contract.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
40
Q

Rule 1

A

C need not be adequate but must be sufficient.

definitive and real, not be intangible

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
41
Q

Chappell v Nestle

A

c must be acceptable, not equal.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
42
Q

White v Bluet

A

a promise not to do something is not good c.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
43
Q

Ward v Blytham

A

a promise to do something is good c.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
44
Q

Rule 2

A

Past consideration is not good consideration

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
45
Q

Re McArdle

A

c must be present or future, not past.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
46
Q

Lampleigh

A

if a party promises payment, courts can enforce it.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
47
Q

Rule 3

A

c must move from the promise

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
48
Q

Tweddle v Atkinson

A

3: must be party to the contract for c to move from them and for courts to enforce it.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
49
Q

Rule 4

A

performing an existing duty cannot be c for a new contract

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
50
Q

Collins v Godfrey

A

rule 4 + Public duty, not enforceable if the duty already exists

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
51
Q

Stilk v Myrick

A

not enforceable to pay employees extra if they are doing what is expected under an existing contract.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
52
Q

Hartley

A

going above and beyond an existing contract, when dangerous; employees entitled to extra pay.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
53
Q

Williams v Roffey

A

c is owed when it is already agreed and the d is benefitting, (allowing work to continue, be completed and avoiding the trouble/expense of engaging others to complete it).

54
Q

Rule 5

A

c may be found where contractual duties are owed to a third party

55
Q

Scotson v Pegg

A

you can make a claim against a third party

56
Q

Rule 6

A

a promise to accept part payment of a pre-existing debt in place of the whole is not c

57
Q

Pinnel 1602

A

can claim a remainder of the debt even if the part payment was agreed to clear it.

58
Q

Foakes v Beer

A

part payment cannot satisfy a debt

59
Q

exception to rule 6

A

accord and satisfaction - part payment can be accepted where there is an agreement to accept something other than money or a smaller sum at an earlier date.

60
Q

Privity of contract

A

only those who are parties to a contract can be bound by it and benefit from it.

61
Q

Dunlop v Selfridge

A

cannot take action against a contract if you are not privy to it

62
Q

Privity and Consideration

A

The rule of privity can be seen as based on the rule that consideration must move from the promise as in Tweddle v Atkinson.

63
Q

Jackson

A

rule 3 would prevent all members to receive damages, only the one who signed the contract.

64
Q

The Contract (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999

A

A third party may enforce a contract against parties if:

  1. They are named
  2. The contract expressly says they can enforce it
  3. They confer the benefits of the contract terms
65
Q

Exception 1: Agency

A

If an agent is authorised to make a contract on behalf of another (principal).
the principal is bound by the contact despite not making it.
The principal and agent are treated as the same person.

66
Q

Exception 2: collateral contracts

A

Shanklin v Detel: The court may be able to avoid the strict rule of privity by finding a second contract alongside the main agreement

67
Q

Exception 3: Restrictive Covenants

A

An agreement between landowners where one party will restrict the use of its land in some way for the benefit of another’s land.
Tulk v Moxhay: the covenant runs with the land.

68
Q

Condition:

A

central to the contract, a breach may allow repudiation.

Poussard

69
Q

Warranty

A

a minor term

Bettini v Gye: the breach of a warranty will allow a claim, but not repudiation.

70
Q

Innominate

A

not a condition or a warranty, whether it is will depend on the consequences of a breach.
HK Fir Shipping v Kawasaki

71
Q
  1. Importance
A

Couchman v Hill: where the statement is important, it is seen as a term.

72
Q
  1. Special Knowledge
A

Oscar Chess v Williams: private seller with the wrong fact = not a term.
Dick Bentley v Harold Smith Motors: car dealer lying = term, more than a statement.

73
Q
  1. Time Lag:
A

a contract made later to the statement, it will not become part of the contract.
Routledge v Mackay: where there is a time lag seen as unimportant it is not a term.

74
Q
  1. Written Contracts
A

Routledge v Mackay: the court presumes everything wanted to be included as a term will be in the contract.

75
Q

Business Efficacy and the Officious Bystander Test

A

Two parts:

  1. Is the term necessary to make the contract effective?
  2. If the parties had thought of it, would a term suggested to them be agreed to have obviously been in the contract?
76
Q

Business Efficacy

The Moorcock

A

it is implied for property to be kept safe upon an agreement and it makes sense for business for it to be kept safe.

77
Q

Officious bystander

A

Shirlaw: gives us the test

78
Q

Hollier v Rambler Motors

A

the failure to sign a document does not stop the contract from being legally binding.

79
Q

Shell UK

A

a term is not implied if the parties would not agree to it.

80
Q

Egan v Static Control Components

A

genuinely implied terms are what the reasonable person would have understood to be the intention of both parties.

81
Q

Marks & Spencer plc v BNP

A

the courts must consider the reasonable person in the position of the parties at the time.

82
Q

Hutton v Warren/Hilas v Acros

A

Custom or conduct of the parties can imply a term.

83
Q

S9 The Consumer Rights Act 2015

A

Applies to contracts and notices between a consumer and a trader.
Satisfactory quality: e.g. description, price or other consideration, fitness for purpose, durability, appearance and finish, safety.

84
Q

Questions to consider whether the clause is part of a contract:

A

Whether the agreement was signed
Whether any notice with the term in it is incorporated in the contract
Whether the term is incorporated due to previous dealings (custom)

85
Q

Signed

A

L’Estrange v Graucon: bound by a written agreement no matter if you read it or not.

86
Q

Curtis v Chemical Cleaning

A

If a clause is queried prior to signing with verbal assurance the exclusion clause may be constructed according to the verbal statement.

87
Q

Notice with the Term in it is Incorporated

A

Incorporation can only happen if at the time the contract was made the unsigned document was brought to the attention of the person. Any attempt to introduce new terms after acceptance will fail unless a new contract is developed.

88
Q

Olley v Marlborough Hotel

A

Terms need to be made clear before signing.

89
Q

Thompson v London, Midland and Scottish Railway

A

The company must take sufficient steps to make customers aware of the terms and conditions.

90
Q

Prior Dealings/Custom

A

Holliver v Ramblar Motors: terms may be incorporated by custom if they are regular and consistent.

91
Q

McCutcheon

A

it must be consistent

92
Q

The effect on third parties

A

If the requirements are established, a third party can rely on an exclusion clause.

93
Q

The Contra Proferentem Rule

A

To remove doubt

Transocean Drilling UK: the rule is to be used where the term is both one-sided and ambiguous.

94
Q

Interfoto Picture Library

A

Where it is onerous, the party seeking to rely on it must have taken reasonable steps to bring it to attention.

95
Q

The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977

A

Protection against clauses in non-consumer contracts.

There are certain exclusion/limitation clauses that are invalidated by the act, making them unenforceable

96
Q

UCTA77 s2(1)

A

can’t exclude liability for death/injury by negligence,

97
Q

UCTA77 s2(2)

A

loss/damage: can’t exclude liability for negligence except in situations where it is reasonable to do so,

98
Q

UCTA77 s6(1)

A

Cannot exclude liability for breach of consumer laws.

99
Q 
Test of Reasonableness:
UCTA77 S11(5) + Warren v Trueprint:
A

the party who inserts and relies on it, must show it is reasonable in the circumstance.

100
Q

UCTA77 S11(1) + Smith v Bush

A

knowledge – the term is reasonable in the light of what was known to the parties at that time.

101
Q

UCTA77 S11(2)

A

Involving breach of implied conditions

102
Q

Watford Electronics

A

Is reasonable when there is equal bargaining power and the clause was subject to negotiation.

103
Q

Consumer Rights Act 2015

Includes:

A

‘fairness’ s62(4): unfair = significant imbalance.
s68(1): must be ‘transparent’
s31(1)(a)-(k): ‘grey list’ of potentially unfair clauses.

104
Q

s31(1)(a)-(k) CRA15

A 
No exclusion for: 
s9 satisfactory quality, 
s10 fit for purpose
s11 to be as described
s51 reasonable price
and more.
105
Q

Economic Duress

A

When someone enters into a contract as the result of financial threats, the contract should not be valid

106
Q

Universe Tankships v ITWF:

A

requirements for economic duress.
There was compulsion or lack of choice for the v.
Pressure must be illegitimate,
It was a significant cause of making the contract.

107
Q

Pao On v Lau Yiu Long:

A

4 factors to determine whether the pressure is illegitimate:

  1. Protest from the victim,
  2. Alternative?
  3. Independent advice?
  4. Steps to avoid the contract after entering into it.
108
Q

CTN Cash v Gallagher

A

duress is not available when the action threatened was lawful.

109
Q

Progress Bulk Carriers

A

Pressure can be illegitimate pressure when lawful threats are made in unusual cases.

110
Q

Five conditions of economic duress:

A

Pressure was exerted
Pressure was illegitimate
Pressure had induced the c to enter the contract
C had no choice but to enter the contract
C protested at the time or shortly after it was made

111
Q

North Ocean Shipping v Hyundai

A

An increase in price and ultimatum over a contract can be pressure.
Continuing payment without protest will affirm the contract and the claim will fail.

112
Q

Atlas Express v Kafco

A

Signing a contract that will help the business whilst also having no choice.

113
Q

There are 4 requirements for a misrepresentation:

A
  1. False statement
  2. Of material fact
  3. Made by a party to the contract
  4. Induces the party to enter into the contract
114
Q

1: False Statement.

A

The statement must not be true or accurate.

115
Q

Fletcher v Krell

A

silence cannot be a misrepresentation

116
Q

With v O’Flanagan

A

there is an obligation to disclose a change of situation if a statement becomes false due to this change.

117
Q

Exceptions:

A

Half-truths - Dimmock v Hallet.
Non-disclosure of required info - Lambert v Co-op Insurance.
When there is a relationship built on trust - Tate v Williamson.

118
Q

Spice Girls v Aprilla

A

a representation can be through actions/conduct, a false statement can be made by the circumstance.

119
Q

2: Material Fact

A

The misrepresentation must be of a material fact that would have led a reasonable person to make the contract and influence their mind.

120
Q

Bisset v Wilkinson

A

genuine belief the opinion was correct so is not a misrepresentation.

121
Q

Edington v Fitzmaurice

A

must be a statement of fact, not just future intention.

122
Q

3: Made by a Party to the Contract

A

A person is not liable for statements made by others unless they are an agent.

123
Q

4: Induces the Other to Entering into the Contract

A

Must lead to the party making the contract.

124
Q

Attwood v Small

A

they must rely on the statement rather than their own judgement or information from elsewhere.

125
Q

Redgrave v Hurd

A

it does not matter if the party could have found the truth by taking reasonable steps or if it was unreasonable to rely on the statement.

126
Q

CRA15 s12(2)

A

Any info from a trader is a term and should be correct even when there is a later change s12(3)

127
Q

Innocent misrepresentation

A

The Misrepresentation Act 1967 (MA67) defines innocent misrepresentation as one which is “genuinely held on reasonable grounds”.

128
Q

Negligent misrepresentation

A

MA67: no special relationship but a statement is made without reasonable grounds.

129
Q

Hedley Byrne v Hellery:

A

Negligent: there is a duty in relation to professional advice, they must take reasonable care to be accurate

130
Q

Fraudulent misrepresentation

A

Derry v Peek: a fraudulent misrepresentation is made by a representor who knows the statement is untrue or was reckless as to its truth.

131
Q

Discharge by breach

A
  • Poussard – actual breach by breaking a condition
  • Bettini – no breach of warranty
  • Hochester de la Tour – anticipatory breach

A Level Law (7 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions