Three Rules in Relation to Acceptance Flashcards
What is required for a valid acceptance in contract law?
A) It must be communicated and match the terms of the offer
B) It must be in writing and signed by both parties
C) It must be made within 24 hours of the offer being given
D) It must include additional terms agreed upon by the offeree
A) It must be communicated and match the terms of the offer
Explanation:
For acceptance to be valid, it must be clearly communicated and mirror the exact terms of the offer (Hyde v Wrench 1840).
Who can accept an offer?
A) Anyone who becomes aware of the offer
B) Only the person or people to whom the offer was made
C) Anyone who benefits from the contract
D) Any third party acting on behalf of the offeree
D) Any third party acting on behalf of the offeree
Explanation:
A third party can accept if they are acting on explicit authority from the offeree, such as an authorized agent in commercial contracts.
What happens if an offeree adds new terms while attempting to accept an offer?
A) The acceptance is still valid if the offeror does not object
B) The acceptance becomes a counter-offer, rejecting the original offer
C) The contract is automatically formed with the new terms included
D) The offeror must negotiate the new terms before proceeding
B) The acceptance becomes a counter-offer, rejecting the original offer
Explanation:
If the offeree modifies the terms of the offer, it is treated as a counter-offer, which replaces and rejects the original offer (Hyde v Wrench 1840).
When is an alternative mode of acceptance valid if the offeror prescribes one?
A) Only if the alternative method is faster than the prescribed one
B) If the offeror does not explicitly exclude other methods
C) Only if the alternative method is communicated in writing
D) Only if the alternative method is discussed before acceptance
C) Only if the alternative method is communicated in writing
Explanation:
Some prescribed methods of acceptance require written confirmation to be valid, especially in formal contracts like real estate or employment agreements.
An employer offers Alice a job by email and states, “Please confirm acceptance by email only.” Alice sends a letter instead. Is there a valid contract?
A) Yes, because Alice accepted the offer
B) No, because the prescribed mode of acceptance was not followed
C) Yes, because email and letter are both written methods
D) No, because Alice did not sign the contract
A) Yes, because Alice accepted the offer
Explanation:
If an alternative mode is used that is no less advantageous and the offeror does not explicitly exclude other methods, it may still be valid (Manchester Diocesan Council v Commercial & General Investments 1970).
Bob emails Sarah, offering to sell his laptop for £500. Sarah responds, “I accept, but can you include a carrying case?” What is the legal status of Sarah’s response?
A) It is a valid acceptance because the laptop price was accepted
B) It is a counter-offer, rejecting the original offer
C) It is a request for information, meaning the original offer remains open
D) It is a legally binding agreement with added terms
C) It is a request for information, meaning the original offer remains open
Explanation:
If an offeree asks for clarification or minor modifications without changing the fundamental terms, it is a request for information (Stevenson, Jacques & Co. v McLean 1880).
Laura is offered a business contract stating, “Respond by post.” Instead, she emails her acceptance. Is the contract valid?
A) No, because Laura did not comply with the offer’s stated method
B) Yes, because email is an instantaneous communication method
C) Yes, because the offeror did not exclude other acceptance methods
D) No, because contracts cannot be accepted electronically
D) No, because contracts cannot be accepted electronically
Explanation:
Some contracts, such as wills or land transactions, require written or signed acceptance by law, so electronic acceptance may not always be valid.
Thomas hears that Michael has offered to sell his car for £5,000. Thomas, without directly speaking to Michael, sends him a letter saying, “I accept your offer.” Is there a contract?
A) Yes, because the offer was made publicly
B) No, because the offer was not made to Thomas directly
C) Yes, because Michael intended to sell the car
D) No, because the letter was not sent through an official channel
B) No, because the offer was not made to Thomas directly
Explanation:
Only intended offerees can accept an offer. Thomas cannot accept an offer that was never addressed to him.
An electronics store advertises, “Buy one TV, get a free sound system.” Customers come to claim the offer, but the store refuses to honor it. Can the customers enforce the offer?
A) No, because advertisements are invitations to treat
B) Yes, because the store made a legally binding unilateral offer
C) No, because contracts require additional negotiation
D) Yes, because consumer protection laws apply
D) Yes, because consumer protection laws apply
Explanation:
Even though advertisements are generally invitations to treat, consumer laws may require a store to honor advertised offers in certain cases.
Emma is offered a contract stating, “Reply by fax.” Instead, she delivers her acceptance by hand. Will the contract be valid?
A) No, because she did not follow the prescribed mode
B) Yes, because in-person delivery is a more secure method
C) No, because the acceptance was not instantaneous
D) Yes, but only if the fax requirement was not exclusive
D) Yes, but only if the fax requirement was not exclusive
Explanation:
If the offer does not explicitly exclude other acceptance methods, a similarly effective mode may be valid (Tinn v Hoffman 1873).
