Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Offer & Acceptance - Coggle Diagram
Offer & Acceptance
Offers
Storer v MCC: A valid offer must be clear, certain and an intention to be bound must be present (Gibson contrasts)
Invitations to treat
Adverts: Partridge v Crittenden: General rule is they are invitations to treat or invite further negotiations (good as there may be limited stock)
Exception: Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co- the rule does not apply to unilateral offers (needs to be a prescribed act and clear intention to be bound)
Displays of goods: Fisher v Bell: Even when described to be offers, they are only invitations to treat (websites are displays of goods)
Invitation to tender: When a party (usually company) wish to purchase a major item or service and the requestor (company) invites offers from those interested in supplying goods/services
-
Exception: Blackpool & Fylde Aero Club Ltd v Blackpool Borough Council- May be a contractual obligation to consider tenders where: tenders have been solicited from specified parties who were known to the requestor, there was a deadline for submission, requestor laid down absolute and non-negotiable conditions for submission
Auctions: Payne v Cave: General rule is putting something up for auction is an invitation to treat, a bid is an offer, and the acceptance of the offer is marked by the hammer
-
Termination
-
Lapse of time: Where acceptance is not made within a prescribed time period or acceptance not made within a reasonable time (depending on circumstances)
Death: If the offeror dies, if the offeree is made aware of the death before acceptance, it lapses. Offeree death causes offer to lapse so it cannot then be accepted by a representative
-
Acceptance
Acceptance must be unqualified: Hyde v Wrench: Acceptance must be a mirror image of terms in the offer
Prescribed mode: Manchester Diocesan Council for Education v Commercial and General Investments: Offeror can prescribe a mode of acceptance if in clear words
Exception: Tinn v Hoffman: Unless the prescribed mode is made mandatory, another mode of acceptance is sufficient so long s it's no less advantageous
-
Third parties can generally communicate acceptance with offeree's approval if circumstances indicate the acceptance as irrevocable
Postal Rule: Adams v Lindsell: Where post deemed to be the proper mode of communication, acceptance is effective the moment the letter is posted
This means it was in the hands of a post office employee authorised to receive letters (not an employee only authorised to deliver letters like a postman) or letterbox
Applies even where delayed or lost in post: Household Fire and Carriage Accident Insurance Co v Grant)
-
-
-
-
-