Offer Flashcards
Language used during the negotiations, case:
Gibson v Manchester City Council (1979)
Facts: Conservative Council wishes to give the tenants an opportunity to buy their house. Received a later that indicated a price, saying: “The Council May be prepared to sell the house to you” at that price. If he wishes to make a formal application, he should complete a form and return it. Labour then won the election and refused.
Held: the language of the Council’s letter was not sufficiently definite to amount to an offer.
Self-service displays, case:
Pharmaceutical Society of GB v Boots Cash Chemists (1953)
Pharmacy and Poisons Act prohibited the sale of certain medicine unless supervised by a pharmacist. Boots had a self-service machine with made them available to people, and then the pharmacist would supervise the transaction.
Held: the sale was made at the cash desk, where the customer offered to buy the medicine, not when they took the item off the shelf.
Shop window displays, case:
Fisher v Bell (1968)
Facts: the defendant displayed in his show window a flick knife with the price attached. Charged with an offence under the Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act, for ‘offering for sake’ a flick knife.
Held: no offence had been committed, because the display of the knife was an invitation to treat, not an offer.
Advertisements, case:
Partridge v Crittenden (1968)
Facts: the defendant put an advert in a ‘classified’ section of a periodical offering for sale bramble finches at 25s each, charged under the Protection of Birds Act for offering for sale live birds.
Held: he had committed no offence because the advert was an invitation to treat. Should be treated in the same way as the display of goods (Fisher v Bell).
Lord Parker also pointed out that if this was an offer, then everyone who replied would be accepting it, and would therefore be entitled to a bramble finch. Assuming the advertiser did not have an infinite supply, this could not be what he intended.
Decision is in line with ‘party freedom’, leaves the advertiser to decide whom to contract with.
Advertisement (offer), if wording is clear, case:
Lefkowitz v Great Minneapolis Surplus Store
Facts: defendants published an advert saying : “Saturday 9am sharp, three brand new fur coats, worth to $100. First come, first served, $1 each.”
Plaintiff arrived but was refused sale because it was claimed it was only open to women.
Court held that the advert constituted an offer because the language was specific.
Guiding principle is promised objectivity, if the wording is clear and there are no problems of supply, offer.
Advertisement, unilateral offer:
Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball (1893)
Facts: manufacturers said that if anybody who bought their smoke ball and used it as directed then caught influenza, they would be paid £100. Company argued the statement should be regarded as ‘mere puff’. There was evidence of serious intent as they moved £1000 into a bank ‘showing our sincerity in this matter’.
Held: in favour of Mrs Carlill. The statement about the £1000 deposit meant that reasonable people would treat the offer to pay £100 as one that was intended seriously.
Auctions, case:
Barry v Heathcote Ball Co Ltd (2001)
Facts: customs & excise selling two machine worth £14,000 each without reserve at an auction. Buyer knew this and got them both for £200 each. Auctioneer refused this and withdrew the machines from sale and sold privately for £750 each.
Held: an auctioneer who conducts a sale ‘without reserve’ is making a binding promise to sell to the highest bidder. Defendant awarded £27,000.
