Which case suggests that knowledge of the offer is not a prerequisite for acceptance?
Understand the Problem
The question is asking for a specific legal case that indicates that being aware of an offer is not necessary for someone to accept it. This relates to contract law and the principles of offer and acceptance.
Answer
*R v Clarke* suggests that lack of knowledge of an offer at the time of the act does not constitute valid acceptance.
The case that suggests knowledge of the offer is not a prerequisite for acceptance is generally not supported, as the general rule requires awareness of the offer for valid acceptance. The source missing from search results, but typically referred to for such discussions, is R v Clarke.
Answer for screen readers
The case that suggests knowledge of the offer is not a prerequisite for acceptance is generally not supported, as the general rule requires awareness of the offer for valid acceptance. The source missing from search results, but typically referred to for such discussions, is R v Clarke.
More Information
R v Clarke is a notable case in contract law. Clarke admitted to having no knowledge of the offer when performing the required act, leading to a decision that acceptance was invalid.
Tips
A common mistake is to assume that anyone performing an act mentioned in an offer automatically accepts it, even without knowledge of the offer.
AI-generated content may contain errors. Please verify critical information
