Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
offers and acceptance (acceptance) - Coggle Diagram
offers and acceptance (acceptance)
acceptance - unconditional assent to all the terms of the offer
Rule 1) method of acceptance usually mirrors the offer
(exception) insisting - if offeror states acceptance must be in specified way
^ Parkinson Stove Co Ltd - if particular acceptance is insisted then this must be followed
^ Yates v Pulleyn - no valid acceptance as it had to have been by notice in writing by 'registered or recorded delivery'
Rule 2) acceptance must be unconditional
Brogden v Metropolitan Railway (HoL) - as coal was still supplied it was a clear acceptance of amended contract (through conduct of both parties), acceptance can be by conduct
e.g. offer terminated if counter offer made (Hyde v Wrench)
Steven son v McLean - request for further information does not terminate an offer
Rule 3) acceptance must be communicated
a) unilateral contracts - acceptance at start of act
b) bilateral contracts - acceptance must be communicated to offeror
c) silence not acceptance (Felthouse v Bindley)
d) postal rule is the exception (Adams v Lindsell) acceptance takes place when the letter is posted therefore there is a contract
the postal rule (Adams v Lindsell)
Re Imperial Land Co of Marseilles - postal rule only applies when it is reasonable to use the post
^ Henthorn v Fraser - where a binding contract was made when acceptance was posted
^ Household Fire Insurance v Grant - valid contract as rule meant acceptance is effective even if letter never arrives
^ Re London & Northern Bank - letter must go into letter box, not given to post man and must be correctly addressed with correct postage
avoiding the postal rule
Holwell Securities v Hughes - using clear wording which states the acceptance has to actually be received will override the postal rule
modern cases involving postal rule
Entores Ltd v Miles Far East Corp. - postal rule does not apply with telex ie, the telex must actually be received
The Brimnes - withdrawal by telex sent within office hours but not read until next day, held that the withdrawal was when the telex was received at the other end, not when it was read by someone
Brinkibon Ltd v Stahag Stahl - different time zones, acceptance by telex was once the office was open
Mondial Shipping case - acceptance effective once office opens but also considered fax machines and said the postal rule doesn't apply to faxes (and by implication - other forms of modern communication ie. emails)
Thomas v BPE Solicitors - acceptance effective on the Friday at 6pm as this was still in office hours despite leaving work at 5:45, it was 'received' in office hours, including how Judge looked at the fact both parties frequently emailed outside these times
telex, fax, telephone and email etc - postal rule does not apply
Kodak case (hadn't gone to court) - email confirmation of orders likely to be deemed 'acceptance' in the legal sense
EU clarification on internet buying
consumer protection (distance selling) regulations 2000 - directive 97/7 - sellers must give buyers information on a) right to cancel within 7 days, b) description of goods, c) price of goods, d) how to pay, e) delivery, f) their identity
electronic commerce (EC Directive) regulations 2002 - by law: a) sellers must allow buyers to amend their order before sending off, b) seller must give a prompt receipt, c) seller must give name and address