hiya all just wondering if anyone has a proper legal definition of
an invitation to treat
and what cases distinguished this definition?
Turn on thread page Beta
what cases define offer and invitation to treat? watch
- Thread Starter
- 13-11-2008 10:28
- 13-11-2008 11:44
In what context?
Here's some of the classics:
Partridge v Crittenden
Carlill v Carbolic
Storer v Manchester CC
Gibson v Manchester CC
Fisher v Bell
Pharmaceutical v Boots
- Thread Starter
- 13-11-2008 12:05
i mean i understand the definition of both but do them cases distinguish the definitions ? I mean, i dont want to use really bad english here but, what cases define the definition ?
- 13-11-2008 12:20
Welcome to the horrible world of the common law.
There is no definition of what qualifies as an ITT and what qualifies as an offer. You won't find a single all-encompassing definition of either in any case. This is the nature of a common law system. The cases explain why an individual situation is or is not an offer. From reading all of these cases you can begin to develop an understanding of the boundaries of invitations to treat versus offers.
Although, maybe you're just asking, what does ITT mean, and what does offer mean.
ITT is a non-binding expression of interest in engaging in a negotiation.
Offer is a binding proposition of contractual relations on specific and invariable terms.
Any of these cases will explain this.
- 22-03-2017 11:32
Does limited stock available for sale indicate an invitation to treat if so which cases
- 12-06-2018 21:34
Fisher v Bell is a good one. That was in my OU law materials concerning invitation to treat
Offline20ReputationRep:Community AssistantPS Reviewer
- Community Assistant
- PS Reviewer
- 12-06-2018 22:13
Please don't resurrect nine year old threads.