Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

Validity of Contracts question... please help!

Hey guys if you could help me out with this question i would appreciate it because i cant find the answer online because i dont know what to search to find it. Here is the example:

Mortimer wished to sell his antique gold watch. He therefore sent his chauffeur with a note to Randolf offering to sell him the watch for £50,000 and that Randolf should give the chauffeur his reply. Randolf was unsure, so he sent the chauffeur back without an answer. After one hour, Randolf posted his letter of acceptance.

The question is, has a valid contract come into existence? I am unsure because the offer did not include a time period; he just asked for the answer to be given to the chauffeur. If he gives no answer, is that refusing the offer? How long would the offer be open for, if no answer is not a refusal?

Reply 1

TheDefiniteArticle

Has Mortimer specified a form of acceptance? Has Randolf complied with that?

Reply 2

Notoriety

Original post by JackHarley

Mortimer wished to sell his antique gold watch. He therefore sent his chauffeur with a note to Randolf offering to sell him the watch for £50,000 and that Randolf should give the chauffeur his reply. Randolf was unsure, so he sent the chauffeur back without an answer. After one hour, Randolf posted his letter of acceptance.

The question is, has a valid contract come into existence? I am unsure because the offer did not include a time period; he just asked for the answer to be given to the chauffeur. If he gives no answer, is that refusing the offer? How long would the offer be open for, if no answer is not a refusal?

All offers, unless expressly stated otherwise, contain an implied time period of a "reasonable time" (Ramsgate Victoria Hotel v Montefiore (1865-66)). However, that for me is not the issue. The issue is "offering to sell him the watch for £50,000 and that Randolf should give the chauffeur his reply." What does this part mean?

It is important to note that the seller used the word should give the chauffeur the reply. The seller thought this part so significant that he sent the chauffeur along with the message—why, because it was an appropriately dramatic way to communicate the offer or was it that the seller placed particular importance on hearing the reply almost immediately, hence his imploring the buyer to tell the present chauffeur.

This is argument is that the terms of the offer were not met, and so the offer was terminated. What the clause really means will be decided by a judge in light of what would be reasonable in the context of the case. If the two parties had previously engaged in contracts where only an immediate response were valid, then that would give favour to my argument. On the other hand, if it was regularly permitted by the parties that they could decline to give a yes or no answer until an hour or two later, that would work against my argument.