Although in Butler Machine the sellers had tried to ensure that their terms were paramount by drafting a clause stating that their terms and conditions would prevail over those in the buyers’ order, this proved ineffective in the face of their express acceptance of the buyers’ counter-offer (the ‘last shot’). The sellers had also claimed that their terms were in fact the last document, because in sending the acknowledgement slip they had again referred to their quotation. This argument failed because the Court of Appeal regarded this reference as relevant only to the issue of the price and not as an attempt to incorporate the sellers’ standard terms of supply. Interestingly, however, Lawton LJ was equally clear in Butler Machine, at p. 406, that, in the absence of the express acknowledgement slip, the buyers would not have been taken to accept the sellers’ terms through accepting physical delivery of the machine since, by that point, they had already made it explicitly clear through other correspondence that they were not accepting.