How about Chapelton v Urban Barry District Council?
The one about the beach chairs... held: putting chairs on beach = offer, because the business owner was willing to contract with whoever was going to pay the price displayed. (So acceptance took place when chair was taken? please read for yourself hehe I've forgotten. should be right. )
Last edited by hazelnote; 06-04-2012 at 17:35.
but no object was taken in this case, merely acceptance through words, so not entirely sure if it will back me up enough
It appears you are looking for similar cases to argue by anology. While this is often a technique used especially in tort cases, but for formation of contract, it is best to go through the policy reasonings of ITT, Offer, Communication of acceptance to support your arguments and form a view.
Last edited by ktwolves; 08-04-2012 at 04:18.
You won't find a case exactly on point - think of how unlikely this issue is to be litigated in actual practice. The problem is set up to make the amounts worth bothering about, but in general if a customer orders £4 worth of sausages and then decides against it and leaves it on a shelf somewhere the supermarket will not take action because it just wouldn't be worth it.
(Original post by wkd)
Sorry contract is not my strongest point as you can probably tell, and in no means do i want anyone to do the answer for me, but i'm struggling to see how i can apply above to said argument.
I understand that i could argue Gregg was ignorant of the offer, and that Harridges performed the act that was requested by him.
I'm also struggling to find a single submission to argue (i have 5 minutes) i know the point of appeal is before grating, therefore can that just be my submission and i use various case examples to back up my submission... or does my submission need to be a fact based on a single case?
There is a criminal case Pilgram v Rice-smith and Another relating to a fraudulent sale at an undervalue at the deli counter. The judge there says something along the lines of "the person at the deli counter had no authority to make a sale at an undervalue", which implies that if the price had been correct there would have been a sale at the deli counter. Afaik that is the only case where deli counter transactions have ever been litigated.
Is this a really common problem question or something? This is the 4th time I have seen this exact thread in the past month.
Last edited by Forum User; 10-04-2012 at 11:52.
It is all about Intention
An invitation to treat is intention to invite others to enter into negotiation
An offer is intention to be bound by the statemen of intention so made.
An acceptance is to conduct onself with the clear intention of having the final words on the process of negotiation.
A counter offer is to show an intention to continue negotation.
What the courts need to decide, having assessed the facts objectively determine the parties' intention, to rule in a manner that makes "business sense". You are to argue on the basis of "business sense".
Last edited by ktwolves; 12-04-2012 at 08:06.