Podcast
Questions and Answers
The court in Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company found that making an advertisement constitutes an offer.
The court in Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company found that making an advertisement constitutes an offer.
True
In Harvey v Facey, the court concluded that Facey's telegram contained an implied acceptance of the offer.
In Harvey v Facey, the court concluded that Facey's telegram contained an implied acceptance of the offer.
False
According to the case of Bob Bushell Ltd v Luxel Varese SAS, the judge applied an objective test to determine the intention of the parties.
According to the case of Bob Bushell Ltd v Luxel Varese SAS, the judge applied an objective test to determine the intention of the parties.
True
In Wilson v Belfast Corporation, it was determined that resolutions of a corporation cannot change once established.
In Wilson v Belfast Corporation, it was determined that resolutions of a corporation cannot change once established.
Signup and view all the answers
Billings v Arnott & Co Ltd involved a notice that was considered to be unconditional and required acceptance.
Billings v Arnott & Co Ltd involved a notice that was considered to be unconditional and required acceptance.
Signup and view all the answers
Stevenson v McLean involved an offer of £40 for delivery over 2 months.
Stevenson v McLean involved an offer of £40 for delivery over 2 months.
Signup and view all the answers
In Butler Machine Tool Co v Ex-Cell-O Corporation, the original offer was for a machine tool priced at £75,535.
In Butler Machine Tool Co v Ex-Cell-O Corporation, the original offer was for a machine tool priced at £75,535.
Signup and view all the answers
Chief Justice Monahan stated that acceptance must be communicated to the other party.
Chief Justice Monahan stated that acceptance must be communicated to the other party.
Signup and view all the answers
Walker was informed of the acceptance of the offer on 1st March 1979.
Walker was informed of the acceptance of the offer on 1st March 1979.
Signup and view all the answers
The offer in the case of Entores v Miles Far East Corporation was about selling beer.
The offer in the case of Entores v Miles Far East Corporation was about selling beer.
Signup and view all the answers
The Act in Fisher v Bell stated that selling or offering to sell knives with automatically opening blades was an offence.
The Act in Fisher v Bell stated that selling or offering to sell knives with automatically opening blades was an offence.
Signup and view all the answers
In Partridge v Crittenden, the defendant was charged with selling bramblefinch cocks.
In Partridge v Crittenden, the defendant was charged with selling bramblefinch cocks.
Signup and view all the answers
The court in Tansey v The College of Occupational Therapists Ltd ruled that the presentation of examination information constituted acceptance of an offer.
The court in Tansey v The College of Occupational Therapists Ltd ruled that the presentation of examination information constituted acceptance of an offer.
Signup and view all the answers
Grainger v Gough established that sending a price-list in an advertisement creates a binding contract to supply that product upon order.
Grainger v Gough established that sending a price-list in an advertisement creates a binding contract to supply that product upon order.
Signup and view all the answers
The legislation regarding flick knives was amended to include those who expose them for sale.
The legislation regarding flick knives was amended to include those who expose them for sale.
Signup and view all the answers
Study Notes
Contract Law Cases
-
Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co [1893]: An advertisement constituted an offer to anyone who followed the conditions. Performance of the conditions was acceptance.
-
Harvey v Facey [1893]: A telegram stating the lowest price for goods did not constitute acceptance. It was merely a response to a question. A mere statement of a price does not imply a contract to sell at that price.
-
Bob Bushell Ltd v Luxel Varese SAS (1998): Objective test applied to determine contractual intention. Objective analysis of the parties’ communications and conduct prior to formation established a contract of sole distributorship.
-
Wilson v Belfast Corporation (1921): Decisions of a corporation may change. No contract was formed in this situation.
-
Billings v Arnott & Co Ltd (1945): Acceptance of an offer is completed when the offeree performs a condition.
-
Fisher v Bell (1961): Goods displayed in a shop window are not offers for sale. This constitutes an invitation to treat.
-
Partridge v Crittenden (1968): An advertisement of goods for sale is an invitation to treat, not an offer.
-
Tansey v The College of Occupational Therapists Ltd (1986): Communication of exam information from a college does not constitute acceptance of an offer.
-
Harris v Nickerson (1873): A declaration of intention doesn't create a binding contract
-
Harvela Investments v Royal Trust Co of Canada: Highest bid was a valid acceptance of the offer of shares.
-
MJB Enterprises Ltd. v Defence Construction Ltd: Contract was approved by an emoji.
-
South West Terminal Ltd v Achter Land (2023): Parties reached an objective understanding, implying a contract.
-
Hyde v Wrench (1840): A counter-offer rejects the original offer, making it impossible to accept later.
-
Wheeler & Co v Jeffrey & Co (1921): Agreement in correspondence is not necessarily a legally binding contract.
-
Butler Machine Tool Co v Ex-Cell-O Corporation: A contract is formed based on the last of the parties' communications, including their own terms if that's mutually agreed upon.
-
Stevenson v McLean (1880): A telegram asking for further terms does not constitute acceptance.
-
Entores v Miles Far East Corporation: Acceptance of an offer by Telex or telegram is complete when the acceptance is received.
-
Walker v Glass (1979): Acceptance of an offer must be communicated to the offeror to form a binding contract; otherwise, the offer is withdrawn.
-
Felthouse v Bindley (1862): Silence cannot constitute acceptance of an offer. To accept a contract you must communicate your acceptance to the other party, or you need to complete an action as a condition of the acceptance.
-
Household Fire Insurance v Grant (1879): Acceptance of an offer is effective once it is posted in order to bind parties, despite this potential inconvenience or hardship.
-
Holwell Securities v Hughes: Acceptance of an offer must be communicated to the offeror. Posting of acceptance does not bind the offeror in all circumstances.
-
Nunin Holdings Pty Ltd v Tullamarine Estates Pty Ltd (1994): An offer isn't binding until acceptance is received by the offeror.
Intention to Create Legal Relations
-
Balfour v Balfour (1919): Agreements between spouses are typically not intended to be legally binding.
-
Merritt v Merritt (1970): A domestic agreement between separated parties is likely intended to be legally binding.
-
Hardwick v Johnson (1978): Intent to create a legal relationship is unlikely between separated parties.
-
Rose & Frank Co v Crompton Bros (1925): The parties' intent in an agreement matters more than the formality of the written document to determine legal standing.
-
Taylor v Brewer: Implied promise, intent to be legally binding.
Studying That Suits You
Use AI to generate personalized quizzes and flashcards to suit your learning preferences.
Related Documents
Description
Explore key contract law cases that shape the principles of contract formation and acceptance. This quiz covers landmark cases such as Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co and Fisher v Bell. Test your understanding of how different rulings influence contractual obligations.
