- valid (clear, certain, addressed to the offeree) - communicated to the offeree - not rejected, revoked or lapsed

- the general rule is that an advert is an ITT i.e. not an offer

- where the parties are invited to provide offers. - this is not an Invitation to Treat nor an offer.

Offer and Acceptance Flashcards by Frederik van Randwyck

The three essential elements required to form a legally binding contract.

consideration
intention to create legal relations
agreement

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

An offer must be

valid (clear, certain, addressed to the offeree)
communicated to the offeree
not rejected, revoked or lapsed

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

An acceptance must be

A mirror of the offer
made by the offeree in response to the offer
communicated to the offeror

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

A valid offer: an expression of willingness to contract on specific terms made with the intention that it is to become legally binding as soon as it is accepted by the person to whom it is addressed

Treitel

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

If the reasonable person would have considered the terms to be as proposed by the other party, despite his intention, then the contract is valid

Smith v Hughes

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

There is an invalid offer when the subjective knowledge of an error defeats the objective appearance of an agreement - also known as ‘snapping up’

Hartog v Colin & Shields

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

For a valid offer the parties must demonstrate an intention to enter into a legal relationship

Language of ‘may’ was not sufficient (Gibson v Manchester CC)
Language of ‘will’ was sufficient (Storer v MCC)

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

An invitation to treat (ITT)

the preliminary stage of negotiations

- an ITT is not an offer

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Adverts

the general rule is that an advert is an ITT i.e. not an offer

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

An advert containing few details was not an offer but an ITT

Partridge v Crittenden

- Partridge was not convicted of offering wild birds for sale.

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

The display of goods is also an ITT

Fisher v Bell

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Placing goods on supermarket shelves is also and invitation to treat. The offer is made by the customers at the till.

Pharmaceutical Society of GB v Boots Chemists

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Parking machines are offering as they are ready to receive the money and the acceptance takes place when the customer puts his money in the slot

Thornton v Shoe Land Parking.

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

The court regarded a pile of deck chairs as the offer and the act of sitting down on them as acceptance

Chapelton v Barry UDC

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Exception: where an advert is clear and certain enough to demonstrate an intention to be bound, and is from the product’s manufacturer, an advert may constitute an offer.

Grainger v Gough

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

An advert conched in a certain language may be an offer, if it is a unilateral offer.

Carill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

A unilateral offer:

one that prescribes an act, the performance of which constitutes acceptance

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Offer and acceptance over the telegram was not in fact concluded when the title deeds were not sent.

Harvey v Facey

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

A letter outlining the conditions for acceptance was found to be merely a preliminary statement as to the price rather than an offer capable of an acceptance.

Clifton v Palumbo

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

The council’s letter to the tenant outlining the purchase price was deemed to be no more than an invitation to treat

Gibson v Manchester CC

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Invitation to Tender

where the parties are invited to provide offers.

- this is not an Invitation to Treat nor an offer.

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

P1 sent in the highest offer, but was not accepted. P2 did not commit to selling to the highest bidder and so was free to choose which offer was accepted or to accept none.

Spencer v Harding

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Exceptions to invitations to tender

if the party calling the bids makes a commitment in relation to the tender.
Blackpool Aero Club v Blackpool BC (not checking their mailbox before the deadline)
Harvela Investments v Royal Trust of Canada (agreed to sell to the highest bidder)

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

At auctions, offers are made by the bidders, and are only accepted by use of the auctioneers hammer. Items can be withdrawn at the auctioneers or bidders discretion at any time before the hammer falls

Payne v Cave

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

The refusal of an auctioneer to accept a low bid and then to subsequently withdraw an Item from auction is a breach of a unilateral contract.

Barry v Davies

An offer must always be communicated to the offeree in one of three ways, so as to give the offeree a chance to accept or reject it

Taylor v Laird - Orally - In writing - by conduct

An offer can be terminated by

- rejection - counter offer - battle of the forms - withdrawal / revocation - lapse

Counter offer

- an attempt to accept an offer on new terms - this is a rejection of the first offer - this also terminates the original offer

The proposal to by a farm for a different offer was deemed to be a counter offer

Hyde v Wrench

An enquiry as to the offer is not a counter offer and therefore does not terminate the offer

Stevenson v McLean

An exploratory letter inquiring as to a reduction in price is not to be considered as a counter offer.

Gibson v Manchester CC

Battle of the forms

parties doing business exchange paperwork which in fact constitutes a written dispute over whose terms are to govern the deal.

The stamping of a delivery note was deemed a counter offer and the acceptance of this offer was the driving of the lorry into the warehouse - an acceptance by conduct.

BRS v Arthur Crutchley

The signing and return of a buyers' tear off slip had made the contract on the buyers terms.

Butler machine tool Co

Withdrawal of an offer can occur anytime before acceptance

Payne v Cave.

Withdrawal of an offer must be communicated to the offeree

Mountford v Scott

Revocation is only effective upon receipt by the offeree

Bryne v van Tienhoven

Revocation of an offer can be communicated indirectly by a 3rd party

Dickenson v Dodds

A unilateral offer may be revoked anytime before complete performance

GNR v Witham

If one has begun to accept the terms of a unilateral offer, they should be allowed to try and complete the act

Denning in Errington v Errington

A lapse of an offer can be caused by a passage of time

Ramsgate v Montefiore

A lapse of an offer can occur from the non-fulfillment of a condition

Financings ltd v Stimson

A lapse of an offer can be caused by the death of a party

Reynolds v Atherton

An acceptance must be a mirror image of the offer, i.e. accepted on the exact same terms

Hyde v Wrench

The motive for an acceptance is irrelevant

Williams v Carwardine

The acceptance must be made by an offeree

Boulton v Jones

An acceptance must be made in response to the offer

R v Clarke

An acceptance must be communicated

Felthouse v Bindley

An acceptance can be communicated by a third party authorised by the offeree

Powell v Lee

Acceptance by conduct is possible

Brogden v Metropolitan Railway

There was no acceptance of an offer for a unilateral contract until the conditions were fully performed

Luxor v Cooper

Once the performance of a condition has begun it is too late for the offer to be withdrawn

Errington v Errington

For unilateral offers, only performance of the act is necessary for the acceptance of an offer.

Carill v Carbolic Smoke Co

Acceptance by conduct

The offeree's conduct may in certain circumstances validly constitute an acceptance of the offer made to him.

The nature of a unilateral contract leads naturally to the inferance that the offeror want's action in response to the offer rather than assent

Carill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co

Generally acceptance cannot be inferred from silence

Felthouse v Bindley

A period of silence does not infer a mutal abandonment of agreement

The Leonidas

Where the offeree himself indicated that an offer is to be taken as accepted if he does not speak the contrary, then silence may be accepted.

Gibson J in Re Selectmove

If the offeror makes it clear that only one form of communication will amount to a satisfactory response this stipulation should be upheld.

Eliason v Henshaw

Where disruption is apparent to the maker of the acceptance, it will not be valid util it has been repeated

Entores v Miles Far East Corp

Communication is deemed to have been transmitted and received during working hours

The Brimnes

For an acceptance by post, acceptance occurs at the moment of posting

Adams v lindsell

An offeror cannot revoke their offer after the acceptance has been posted as his offer has already been accepted

Bryne v van Tienhoven

A posted acceptance must be properly posted - in a royal mail postbox or given to an employee authorised to receive letters

Re London and Northern Bank, ex p Jones

The acceptance is still valid, even if the letter is lost or destroyed in the post

Household fire Insurance Co v Grant.

If a postal acceptance is addressed incorrectly by the offeree then it is only valid from the moment that it arrives

Getreide v Contimar

If there is a misdirected communication, the acceptance is not made

Korbetis v Transgrain Shipping

A postal acceptance is not made if it is not reasonable to use the post (a postal strike is on)

Henthorn v Fraser

A postal acceptance is not made if the application of the 'postal rule' would cause 'manifest inconvenience and absurdity'

Howell Securities v Huges

For instantaneous communication, acceptance occurs when the communication is received.

Entores v Mile Far Eastern Corp

If the acceptance is received within office hours but the offeror does not read it , that still counts as communication as the offeror is to blame for ignoring it.

The Brimnes

if acceptance has been received outside office hours, then it counts as having been received at the beginning of the next working day.

Mandial Shipping v Astarte Shipping

Conditional Agreement

A condition which is binding pending the occurrence of a condition (Winn v Bull)

Deferred agreements

The postponement of legal relations until the conclusion of a formal contract (Chillingworth v Esche)

The usual meaning of 'subject to contract' suggests the liberty to withdraw but also that the agreement was intended to create a duty to exchange contracts.

Alpen Stow v Regalian Properties

Pre-emptive agreement

the insertion of words into an agreement that will postpone the point of which they are legally binding

An agreement to negotiate is a pre-emptive agreement

Courtney v Fairburn

There will not be a contract with a pre-emptive agreement, as it is too uncertain to have a binding force

Denning in Courtney v Fairburn

A resolution of incomplete incompleteness

- agreed machinery | - Severance of meaningless expressions

Agreed machinery for resolving disputes

- an agreement to agree on a fair price (Sudbrook v Eggleton) - An agreement to agree can be a binding contract (Foley v Classique Coaches)

Severance of meaningless expressions

- contract will not be void on the basis of an unclear statement, but rather severable from the main contract. (Nicole v Simmonds)

Vague Agreements

- the courts will try to upload a contract where possible | - some uncertainties are incapable of resolution

There is a presumption that an intention to create legal relations exists in commercial arrangements

Rees v Parker

There is a presumption of no intention to create legal relations in social and domestic arrangements

Balfour v Balfour

An offer made in a pub was held not to have been made with an intention to be bound

Blue v Ashley

To create a contract there must be a common intention to of the parties to enter into legal obligation, mutually communicated expressly or impliedly

Rove and Frank v Compton Bros