Offer and Acceptance

Question 0

Grainger v Gough (1896)

Answer 0

Wine list not offer to sell, invitation to treat, seller not agreeing to sell unlimited quantity of wine.

Question 1

Partridge v Crittenden (1968)

Answer 1

Defendant advertising bird for sale, not an offer to sell, not willing to supply unlimited quantity, an invitation to treat.

Question 2

Fisher v Bell (1961)

Answer 2

Window display of flick knives invitation to treat rather than offer to sell.

Question 3

Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists (1952)

Answer 3

Goods on shelves not offer, an individual removing an item does not form a contract as they would then be unable to replace the item, point of contract occurs at till.

Question 4

Lasky v The Economy Grocery Stores (1946)

Answer 4

Tonic water exploded whilst in an individual’s basket injuring them, no contract was present at that point.

Question 5

Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking (1971)

Answer 5

Automatic car park, ticket machine was an open offer, getting a ticket was acceptance and a contract was created when a ticket was received.

Question 6

Re Card Charge Services (1989)

Answer 6

A fuel pump is an open offer, putting fuel into your car is acceptance and a contract is formed, it is a point of no return, the fuel cannot be replaced after it has been taken.

Question 7

GN Railway v Witham (1873)

Answer 7

Unilateral contract to named individual - Individual had contract to supply rail company, they did not have to request good but if they did the individual was bound to supply them.
Unilateral contracts can not be revoked once they have been taken up.

Question 8

Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company (1893)

Answer 8

Unilateral contract to the world, promised £100 to anyone who had used their product and still contracted flu, said they’d deposited £1000 for payments to show their sincerity, proves that it was an offer.
As a general rule it is necessary to communicate notify acceptance of an offer.

Question 9

Bowerman v ABTA (1996)

Answer 9

ABTA produced a poster promising recovery of “money paid out in respect to travel arrangements”, despite vague language there was a contract as any person reading the poster would see it as a promise.

Question 10

Tinn v Hoffman (1873)

Answer 10

On the same day the parties posted identical but opposite offers to each other, a contract was not formed as they did not know of each other’s offers.
If an offer is rejected it ceases to have legal force.

Question 11

Offer v Davies (1862)

Answer 11

If an offer is revoked before acceptance it is legal. In this situation a promise to guarantee payments for 12 months was revoked.

Question 12

Byrne & Co v VanTienhoven & Co (1880)

Answer 12

VT offered B a contract, B accepted but he did not know that VT had already posted a revocation. Held: the contract stood as when B accepted he did not know that the offer had been revoked.

Question 13

Shuey v United States (1874)

Answer 13

Reward offered for apprehension of criminal but later revoked. Shuey did not know this, but the court held that he should have known that the offer could be revoked in the same way that it was made.

Question 14

Hyde v Wrench (1840)

Answer 14

Farm was for sale, an individual made a lower offer which the seller rejected. The individual then offered the original asking price but the seller did not have to accept as the counter offer voided the original offer.

Question 15

Stevenson, Jaques & Co v McLean (1880)

Answer 15

Iron was being offered for sale. The company asked if the seller would accept credit. Held: this was not a counter offer, simply a request for information, so the original offer was still good.

Question 16

Butler Machine Tool v Ex-Cell-O Corpn (1979)

Answer 16

Last party to assert terms and conditions wins a battle of the forms and their terms and conditions apply.

Question 17

Percy Trentham v Archital Luxfer (1993)

Answer 17

Battle of the forms continued while work was carried out, neither party accepted the other’s terms and conditions, court held that the contract could not be analysed by offer and acceptance but a contract came into existence by performance of the work.

Question 18

Tekdata Interconnections Ltd v Amphenol Ltd (2009)

Answer 18

Modern battle of the forms, court referred to the last company to assert their terms and conditions.

Question 19

Brogden v Metropolitan Railway (1877)

Answer 19

Coal supply contract was drafted, amendments were made but the contract was left in a drawer and no formal acceptance was communicated, performance of the contract occurred anyway so the court held that acceptance was shown by performance.

Question 20

Entores v Miles Far East Corpn (1955)

Answer 20

Telex message containing offer sent to Holland, acceptance sent my telex to London, held: the contract was formed upon communication to the offeror, so it occurred in London.

Question 21

Adams v Lindsell (1818)

Answer 21

Acceptance by post, offer made by post but arrived late, recipient accepted immediately by post but the seller had changed their mind, Held: contract was formed at the moment of posting the acceptance.

Question 22

Household Fire & Carriage Accident Insurance Co v Grant (1879)

Answer 22

Postal acceptance rule applies even if letter of acceptance never arrives.

Question 23

Holwell Securities v Hughes (1974)

Answer 23

Option to purchase land required “notice in writing”, held: postal rule did not apply, the word “notice” implied that the acceptance needed to be communicated effectively to the offeror.

Question 24

Brinkinbon v Stahag Stahl mbH (1983)

Answer 24

Acceptance sent using telex, held: no universal rule of acceptance can cover all cases of instantaneous communication, cases must be solved by reference to the intentions of the parties, sound business practice and in some cases where risks should lie.

Question 25

Tenax Steamship Co v The Brimnes (1975)

Answer 25

Withdrawal of offer sent during office hours by telex, but it wasn’t read until the next day. Held: Withdrawal valid from when it should have been read.

Question 26

Thomas v BPE Solicitors (2010)

Answer 26

Concerning emails between solicitors, postal rule is inapplicable, cases should be solved by reference to intentions, sound business practice and judgements about risk.

Question 27

Felthouse v Bindley (1863)

Answer 27

Nephew wanted to buy horse from uncle, said that if he heard no more he’d consider the purchase completed, held: contracts cannot be formed by silence.

Question 28

Re Selectmove Ltd (1995)

Answer 28

If an offeree indicates that an offer is to be accepted unless he indicates to the contrary a contract can be formed.

Question 29

Fitch v Shedakar (1868)

Answer 29

Reward for information about a murder, information given by claimant with no knowledge of a reward, motive was public good, held: no contract for reward. You must have knowledge of an offer to accept it.

Question 30

Williams v Carwardine (1833)

Answer 30

Reward for information about a murder, information given with knowledge of reward but motive was to clear conscience, held: motive irrelevant, reward granted. As long as there is knowledge of the offer it can be accepted

Question 31

Storer v Manchester City Council (1974)

Answer 31

Plaintiff received agreement for sale of house from council, included p’s details and details about the property, commencement date left blank, p signed the agreement and returned it, at this point the contract was concluded.

Question 32

Gibson v Manchester City Council (1979)

Answer 32

Gibson was offered the chance to buy his house from the council, was not an offer to buy the house and replying to it did not form a contract, promise wasn’t present, specific instructions needed to be present and intention on the part of the offeror needed to be present.

Question 33

Smith v Hughes (1871)

Answer 33

If a man conducts himself in a way that a reasonable man would think that he is assenting to the terms proposed, he is bound.