Formation Case Cards Flashcards
Storer v Manchester City council
Offers are firm and sufficient. Standard form agreement of sale with definite terms
Partridge v Crittenden
Advertisements are invitations to treat. P put advertisement for sale of protected birds. Wasn’t an offer.
Harvey v Facey
A supply of Information is neither an offer or invitation to treat. Telegraph asking what lowest acceptable price was just a statement.
Harris v Nickerson
A statement of intention is not legally binding. Individual made a statement that he would sell furniture at auction, he did not have to put them for sale it was a statement of intention.
Carlill v Carbolic smoke ball
Unilateral Contract, one party has obligations and performance is open to anyone. Smoke ball to clear the flu. They put $ in a bank if you used their product and it didn’t clear the flue. Carlill used the product and it didn’t help, she was entitled to $.
Soulsburry v Soulsburry
Unilateral Contract. Ex-wife and husband agreed to forgo alimony and instead leave her $100k in his will. He performed unilaterally be not seeking alimony.
Byrne v Van tien Hoven
Revocation of contract must be communicated to the Offeree. B sent letter to VTH but before it arrived VTH accepted by Fax. It was a binding contract.
Errington v Errington
Once performance has begun on a unilateral contract, it cannot be revoked. Father bought son/wife house and as long as they paid mortgage they would inherit house.
Hyde v Wrench
Rejection, if you reject an offer or counter offer the original offer is void.
Felthouse v Bindley
An offer cannot be accepted by silence. Sale of horse “if you don’t message me i assume you accept” not valid.
Household fire Insurance v Grant
Postal acceptance rule: Acceptance takes place upon posting in mail. Letter for purchase of shares was valid.
Allianz Insurance v Aigaion
Emails can be acceptance. Series of emails with electronic signatures.
Balfour v Balfour
Domestic/social relations presume to have no intention to contract. Husband left for Sri Lanka and promised money. Not legally binding.
Parker v Clark
Family relations can be valid if there is clear intention to contract. P sold house to live with C on promise of inheritance of property.
May & Butcher v R
Essential terms must be sufficiently clear. Sale of crown tents, with price to be determined later was not valid.
Nicolene v Simmonds
Term cannot be vague or it will be struck out.
Raffles v Wickelhaus “the Peerless”
No ambiguity. Sale of cotton to come on ship called “The Peerless” 2 ships called that arriving at different times. Term too vague.
Combe v Combe
Consideration must have some value in law. Husband said he would make payments to wife, but void for lack of consideration.
Offord v Davies
Consideration must move from the promisee, but not necessarily to the promisor
Thomas v Thomas
Consideration need be Sufficient not Adequate. Wife given lease for life at $1 a year is valid.
Chappell v Nestle
Consideration need be Sufficient not Adequate. N’s offer of 3 wrappers for a record were held to be of economic value and good consideration.
Roscorla v Thomas
Past consideration is not good consideration. Horse sold. afterwards said to be sound and wast.
Pao On Past Consideration Test
When Past consideration can be good consideration.
1) Promisee performed act at Promisors request
2) Understanding that Promisee would be remunerated
3) Remuneration would have been legally enforceable had it been promised in advance.
Glasbrook v Gamorgan City council
Anythign above and beyond a legal duty is good consideration. Police officers provided extra protection during a strike.
