Offer and acceptance

Question 1

Courts will look for the moment of the agreement through their correspondence

Answer 1

(Gibson v Manchester CC[1979]).

Question 2

Unilateral contracts

Answer 2

a promise for an act, only one person is bound (GN Ry v Witham (1873)).

Question 3

Offers can be agreed through conduct

Answer 3

i.e. entering a bus (WIlkie v London Passenger Transport [1947] or a race (The Satanita [1897]).

Question 4

The offer

Answer 4

Offers made are binding on acceptance even with mistake (Centrovincial v Merchant Investors [1983]).

Question 5

Advertisements

Answer 5

Advertisements are invitations to treat and not contracts (Partridge v Crittenden [1968]). Displays of prices are invitations to treat (Timothy v Simpson (1834)). Unless advert says the goods will be sold to he who pays the price (Warwickshire CC v Johnson [1993]).

Question 6

Display of goods in machine

Answer 6

Display of goods in machine is an offer (Thornton v Shoe Lane [1971]).

Question 7

Invitations to tender

Answer 7

Invitations to tender are not offers unless they state the highest/lowest tender will be accepted (Harvela v Royal Trust [1986]).

Question 8

Auctions

Answer 8

Auctions ‘without reserve’ are offers for the highest bidder (Warlow v Harrison (1859) and Barry v Davies [2000]). Offers can be retracted before fall of the hammer (SoGA s57).

Question 9

General offers

Answer 9

In general offers obligation only arises upon completion of the act (NZ Shipping v Satterthwaite [1975]) and the earliest will be rewarded (Lancaster v Walsh (1838)).

Question 10

Acceptance in ignorance?

Answer 10

There can be no acceptance in ignorance of an offer (Taylor v Allon [1966])

Question 11

Cross offers

Answer 11

cross offers cancel each other out (Tinn v Hoffman (1873)).

Question 12

Rendering of services as offer

Answer 12

Rendering of services must be made beforehand or offeree not liable to pay (Taylor v Laird (1856)).

Question 13

The acceptance

Answer 13

Offer and acceptance must correspond (mirror image rule). Can be done by words or conduct (Brogden v Met Ry (1877)).

Question 14

Counter offer

Answer 14

A counter offer is a rejection (Hyde v Wrench (1840)). Changing the terms is a counter offer (Jones v Daniel [1894]). A mere inquiry into the terms is not a coutner offer (Jacques and Co v McLean (1880)).

Question 15

Terms of the acceptance

Answer 15

The acceptance must be unequivocal and silence is insufficient (Brogden v Met Ry). It must be communicated to offeror (Carlill). This can be waivered (Carlill). Acceptace can be deemed by proved intention (Felthouse v Brindley (1862)).

Question 16

Postal acceptance rule

Answer 16

The postal acceptance rule is an exception where acceptance is deemed when the letter is posted (Adams v Lindsell (1818)). The offeror bears the risk of the letter beign lost or delayed. If an acceptance is done for a reason other than the offer, then the reward goes to them (Williams v Carwardine (1833).

Question 17

Revoking an offer

Answer 17

Offers can be revoked but only before acceptance (GN Ry v Witham (1873)). Unilateral contracts are irrevocable after performance has begun (Errington v Errington [1952]). Revocation must be communicated (Byrne v Van Tienhoven (1880)). A revocation will be deemed communicated when in the ordinary course of business it should have been brought to the offeree’s intention (The Brimnes [1975]) although this does not count near or after close of working day (Brinkibon [1983]). Revocations can come through the wind (Dickinson v Dodds (1876)).

Question 18

Lapse in time

Answer 18

An offer can lapse in time if so expressed in the offer (Dickinson v Dodds (1876)). The courts decide what the effluxion of a reasonable time amounts to (Ramsgate Hotel v Montefiore (1866)).

Question 19

Death of offeror/offeree

Answer 19

Death of an offeror or offeree terminates a contract. representatives of an offeree’s estate cannot accept a contract (Re Cheshire Banking (1886)).

Question 20

Certainty of terms

Answer 20

All terms must be agreed to & certain or else the contract may be null (Foley v Classique [1934]).
All terms must be clear and certain (Bishop & Baxter v Anglo Eastern Trading [1944] and Scammell v Ouston [1941]). The courts put a fair construction on the terms of the contract (Hillas v Arcos [1932]). The courts can strike out meaningless terms and give effect to the rest (Nicolene v Simmonds [1953]).

Question 21

Incomplete agreements

Answer 21

With incomplete agreements a revival of negotiations can occur with consent of both parties (Perry v Suffields [1916]).

Question 22

Letters of intent

Answer 22

Letters of intent have no contractual effect (Kleinwort Bensn v Malaysia Mining Corp [1989]).

Question 23

Intention to create legal relations

Answer 23

A requirement for a contract which outrules the creation of contracts in family or friend settings.

Question 24

Not purporting to have contractual effects

Answer 24

A statement made in the course of conversation will not be binding notwithstanding the action upon it (Weeks v Tybald (1605)).

Question 25

Social and family arrangements

Answer 25

Social engagement promises cannot have contractual effect (Coward v Motor Insurers Bureau [1963]). Family arrangements likewise (Balfour v Balfour [1919]). Can only be rebutted by inference from language (Parker v Clark [1960]).

Question 26

In a commercial context

Answer 26

In a commercial context, onus on party to prove that agreement had no intention for legal relations is a heavy burden (Edwards v Skyways [1964]). It is subject to a reasonable person test (British Airways Board v Taylor [1976]).