Week 2 Offer and acceptance cases

Question 1

State the year and underline the events that led to the Gibson v. Manchester City council case

Answer 1

Gibson v. Manchester city council (1979)
Gibson was negotiating mortgage prices with the council
The council sent him a letter that they may be willing to sell at a lower price
Gibson completed and delivered the application for this sale
The council’s policy changed after election and the sale did not happen
Gibson then sued

Question 2

State the year, ruling and point of law of Gibson v. the Manchester City council

Answer 2

1979
There has to be a clear offer for it to be accepted, ‘May be willing to sell is not a clear offer’ hence no binding contract had been formed

Question 3

Define Invitation 2 treat or I2T

Answer 3

I2T describes a situation where one party invites others to make an offer to enter into a contract

Question 4

State the year and the events which led to the pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v. Boots Cash Chemists Ltd

Answer 4

Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v. Boots Cash Chemists Ltd (1953)
Boots operated a self service system for customers
It was an offence to these goods without a pharmacist
The society argued that the offer was the goods on the shelves and the acceptance was a customer accepting this offer and since no pharmacist supervised this process it was a violation

Question 5

State the year, ruling and point of law in the Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v. Boots Cash Chemists LTD

Answer 5

1953
The ruling was that goods with a price offer on shop shelves was not sufficient to be considered an offer rather an invitation to treat hence the customer makes the offer to the store who decides to accept or reject it I2T

Question 6

State the year and events that led to FIsher v. Bell

Answer 6

Fisher v. Bell (1961)
The defendant, Bell displayed a flick knife with a price next to.
This flick knife was illegal to sell.
Bell was charged with offering to sell an illegal item

Question 7

State the year, ruling and point of law in Fisher v. Bell

Answer 7

1961
The ruling was the the shop display was an invitation to treat and not an offer, the defendant would be in the wrong if he had sold the good.
The point of law is Goods on display in a shop window are considered an I2T

Question 8

State the year and the events that led up to Partridge v. Crittenden

Answer 8

Partridge v. Crittenden (1968)
Partridge placed an advert for selling a good at a certain price
At no point did he use the words offer for sale
Partridge was charged with illegally offering to sell a wild live bird

Question 9

State the year, ruling and point of law in Partridge v. Crittenden

Answer 9

1968
The court said the advertisement was not an offer but an I2T so no offence had been committed hence the point of law is that advertisements are an I2T and not an offer

Question 10

In bilateral contracts when the offeree performs the requested act the offeror becomes obligated to fulfil their promise

Answer 10

becomes obligated to fulfil their promise

Question 11

State the year of Carlil v. Carbolic Smoke Ball LTD and the events leading up to the case

Answer 11

Carlil v. Carbolic Smoke Ball LTD (1893)
Advert from Carbolic promised 100 pounds to whoever contracted the flu after using their product.
Carlil contracted the flu after using the product and carbolic refused to pay

Question 12

State the year, ruling and point of law in Carlil v. Carbolic Smoke Ball LTD

Answer 12

1893
The court ruled that the offer was unilateral and that the communication of acceptance wasn’t necessary.
the point of law is that when advertisements are made in clear terms they can be treated as offers

Question 13

are inviters (I2T) or tenders obligated to accept the offer’s offer

Answer 13

No

Question 14

State the year Spencer v. Harding happened and the events leading up to the case

Answer 14

Spencer v. Harding (1870)
The defendants were selling stock and sent a circular asking for offers
The defendant did not promise to sell stock to the highest bidder
The claimants made the highest offer
The defendants did not accept

Question 15

State the year, ruling and point of law in the Spencer v. Harding Case

Answer 15

1870
The circular sent out was an I2T and not an offer hence the defendants had no obligation to accept
The point of law here is that Tenders are considered I2T unless performance is indicated

Question 16

State the year and the events that led up to Harvela Investments v. Royal Trust of Canada

Answer 16

Harvela Investments v. Royal Trust of Canada (1985)
The defendant invited offers by sealed tender stating the highest bid would be accepted
Harvela offered a sum of money
Another individual offered a lower sum or 101k higher than the highest bidder
Royal trust accepted the second offer and Harvela sued

Question 17

State the year, ruling and point of Law in Harvela Investments v. Royal Trust of Canada

Answer 17

1985
The ruling that the individual was not entitled to submit a referential bid
The point of law is that you cannot have referential tenders

Question 18

State the year of and the events that led up to Harvey v. Facey

Answer 18

Harvey v. Facey (1893)
The defendant was negotiating property price
Harvey asked for the lowest cash price
Facey replied 900
Harvey responded and attempted to accept the offer
Facey refused to sell and harvey sued

Question 19

State the year, ruling and point of law for Harvey vs Facey

Answer 19

1893
The statement of the lowest price was not considered an offer merely a response to a request for information hence Harvey had no obligation to accept the offer
The point of law is that requests for information are not considered offers

Question 20

State the year and events that led up to Bloom v. American Swift Watch

Answer 20

Bloom v. American Swift Watch (1915)
Claimant gave information on a jewel their
Later Bloom tried to accept the reward

Question 21

State the year, ruling and point of law in the Bloom v. American Swift Watch

Answer 21

1915
The defendant was not legally required to pay Bloom as he didn’t know about the offer when he gave the information
The point of law being an offer must be communicated before it can be accepted

Question 22

State the year and events that led up to R v. Clarke

Answer 22

R v. Clarke (1927)
Clarke tried to claim reward for information that led to a murder conviction
Clarke gave this information when he was on trial to clear his own name
Clark had forgotten about the offer when he gave the information

Question 23

State the year, ruling and point of law in R v. Clarke

Answer 23

1927
It was ruled Clarke had forgotten aboput the offer as he had given the information to clear his own name the point of law being that you must be responding to an offer to accept it

Question 24

State the year and events that led up to Brogden v. Metropolitan Railway Company

Answer 24

Brogden v. Metropolitan Railway Company (1877)
Brogden supplied coal to the defendant for years
A draft agreement was written which Brogden amended and signed
Years later there was a dispute and Brogden argued his counter offer was never accepted

Question 25

State the year, ruling and point of law in Brogden v. Metropolitan Railway Company

Answer 25

1877
The ruling was that the draft was a counter offer that wasn’t accepted but it was accepted through the actions of both parties the point of law being that you can accept an offer through actions

Question 26

State the year and events that led up to Ramsgate Victoria Hotel v. Montefiore

Answer 26

1866
Montefiore offered to buy shares in june
Ramsgate accepted in November when the share price has lowered
Montefiore no longer wanted the shares

Question 27

State the year, ruling and point of Law in Ramsgate v. Montefiore

Answer 27

1866
ruled in favour of Montefiore as when a time limit is specified acceptance must occur within the time limit, if there is no time limit the offer will lapse after a reasonable period of time

Question 28

State the year and events leading up to Hyde v. Wrench

Answer 28

1840
Wrench offered to sell his farm and Hyde rejected
Hyde offered to buy for cheaper and Wrench rejected
Hyde agreed to the original price and Wrench rejected

Question 29

State the year, ruling and point of law in Hyde v. Wrench

Answer 29

1840
The ruling was that when Hyde offered to buy for cheaper he counter offered which terminated the contract the point of law being that counter offers and rejection terminate contracts

Question 30

State the year and the events that led up to Stevenson v. Mclean

Answer 30

1880
Mclean agreed to sell iron to Stevenson
Stevenson telegraphed to ask if he could pay it over 2 months and received no response
Stevenson then telegraphed again saying he would buy the iron
Mclean sold to somone else

Question 31

State the year, ruling and point of law in Stevenson v. Mclean

Answer 31

1880
The first telegraph Stevenson sent was a request for information and did not qualify as contract termination, since the second telegraph was a final expression of assent to the contract the court ruled against Mclean

Question 32

Describe 3 points of Law that are associated with revocation of offers (Bilateral offers)

Answer 32

Revocation of an offer can only be accepted once the revocation is received
Revocation can still be effective if it arrives within office hours and is not read
And an offer can be withdrawn at any time before an offer is accepted, this can be communicated by third parties

Question 33

State the year and the events that led up to Errington v. Errington and Woods

Answer 33

1952
A father bought a house for his son a daughter in law saying that if they paid the mortgage on time consistently they could keep the house.
He passed away and his widow claimed the house
Errington Sued

Question 34

State the year, ruling and point of law in Errigton v. Errignton and Woods

Answer 34

1952
The fathers promise was unilateral and couldn’t be cancelled once the couple entered performance hence as long as the payments were continued the couple were entitled to the property
the point of law here is that when performance has started the individual performing is to be given a reasonable period of time to complete the act

Question 35

State the year and the events that led up to Shuey v. US

Answer 35

1875
The US posted a reward for information on a criminal
7 Months later they revoked this offer in the same manner
Unaware of revocation Mr Marie provided information that led to the arrest
Mr Marie was not paid by the US and Shuey sued

Question 36

State the year, ruling and point of law in Shuey v. US

Answer 36

1875
The case was ruled against Shuey as although Mr Marie genuinely didn’t know it didn’t matter
the point of law is that offers to the world must be revoked with the same notoriety they were made with

Question 37

State the year and events that led up to Felthouse v. Bindley

Answer 37

1862
Felthouse wanted to buy a horse from his nephew
He stated that he’d buy it for 30.15
Nephew did not reply but told auctioneer not to sell the horse
The horse was sold and Felthouse sued The auctioneer (Bindley)

Question 38

State the year, ruling and point of law in Felthouse v. Bindley

Answer 38

1862
There was no legally binding contract formed as the nephew had not communicated acceptance in any way
The point of law states that silence or intention is not sufficient for contract formation

Question 39

State the year and events that led up to Yale Building Co LTD v. Pulleyn & Sons

Answer 39

1975
Pulleyn offered Yale an option to buy building plots
Pulleyn said the option was excersizeable through by registered or recorded delivery
Yale replied by normal post and pulleyn refused to sell

Question 40

State the year, ruling and point of law in Tale building co LTD v. Pulleyn & Sons

Answer 40

1975
The court ruled in Pulleyn’s favour
The point of law is that if an offer states a specific method of acceptance the acceptance will only be valid in that form

Question 41

State the year and events that led up to Adams v. Lindsell

Answer 41

1818
Lindsell offered Adams to sell wool requiring an answer in the post by 7th Sept
The plaintiff posted their acceptance on the 5th but it did not arrive until the 9th and on the 8th Lindsey had sold to someone else and Adams sued

Question 42

State the year, ruling and point of law in Adams v. Lindsell

Answer 42

1818
The court ruled in Adams favour stating that acceptance is valid as soon as it is in the post
The point of law is that acceptance is confirmed on dispatch of the letter unless the offer states otherwise

Question 43

State the year and events that led up to Howell Securities v. Hughes

Answer 43

1974
Hughes granted Howell an opportunity to purchase land, the opportunity had to be exercised within 6 months in writing
Howell replied in the post but it was lost in the post

Question 44

State the year, ruling and point of law in Howell Securities v. Hughes

Answer 44

1974
The court ruled that acceptance had to be received as the offer stated it wanted notice in writing
The point of law here is that the postal rule can be excluded if stated in the offer

Question 45

State the year and events leading up to Brinkibon LTD v. Stahag Stahal

Answer 45

1983
Brinkibon bought steel from Stahag
Brinkibon sent acceptance by telex to vienna
Later Brinkibon wanted to serve an out of jurisdiction party, this would only be possible if the contract was formed in England

Question 46

State the year, ruling and point of law in the Brinkibon LTD v. Stahag Stahal

Answer 46

1983
The ruling was against Brinkibon as acceptance is valid when and where it received within office hours and not when and where it was sent from

Question 47

state the year and events that led to Butler Machine tool LTD v. Ex-Cell-O Corp

Answer 47

1979
Butler sent a contract saying that the prices were fixed but are subject to fluctuation
Ex-Cell-O replied with an order and a place to sign
Butler signed and returned saying that the original term applied
Nothing was said and when the goods were delivered Butler demanded more

Question 48

State the year, ruling and point of Law in Butler Machine too LTD v. Ex-Cell-O Corp

Answer 48

1979
The ruling was against Butler machine as Ex-Cell had sent the final offer which when signed and returned was accepted by Butler
The point of law being the last terms provided before acceptance will be the terms of the contract