Acceptance

Question 1

Felthouse v Bindley (1862)

Answer 1

‘Silence’ cannot be objectively identified as acceptance.

Question 2

Brogden v Metropolitan Railway (1877)

Answer 2

Putting the letter in the contract is not acceptance. However, sending the goods as in the contract amounts to acceptance by conduct.

Question 3

Hyde v Wrench (1840)

Answer 3

Counter offer is not acceptance. Mirror image rule.

Question 4

Butler Machine Tool Co Ltd v Ex-Cell-O Corp (England) Ltd [1979]

Question 5

RTS Flexible Systems Ltd v Molkerei Alois Müller GmbH & Co (UK Production) [2010]

Answer 5

In the contract, it says “subject to contract” in order to eliminate the communicated words from being a part of the contract. The conduct of starting to build something is the acceptance of contract.

Question 6

Smith v Hughes (1871)

Answer 6

Affirmed the use of the ‘promisee objectivity’

Question 7

Adams v Lindsell (1818)

Answer 7

The use of traditional postal rule  The acceptance takes place when the acceptance was posted.

Question 8

Henthorn v Fraser [1892] 2 Ch 27

Answer 8

Revocation must be ‘communicated’ to the other when acceptance can be just ‘posted’.

Question 9

Hillas v Arcos (1932)

Answer 9

Without sorting out what ‘fair specification’ means, there is no knowing if the will is met

Question 10

Scammell and Nephew Ltd v Ouston [1941] AC 251

Answer 10

If a price is not put in a contract, it should be reasonable price. S. 8 Sale of Goods Act 1979 (see also s. 15 Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982/ s.51 Consumer Rights Act 2015)

Question 11

May & Butcher v R [1934]

Answer 11

Price to be agreed by someone else? (s.9 Sale of Goods Act 1979)

Question 12

Joanne Properties v Moneything Capital [2020]

Answer 12

Emails to compromise an action were sent between the parties. The emails were headed “without prejudice and subject to contract.”

Question 13

Walford v Miles [1992] 2 AC 128

Answer 13

‘Promising that they will enter into the contract’ does not work.

Question 14

Pitt v PHH Asset Management Ltd [1994]

Answer 14

• Lock out agreement – for “a certain period of time”, I will negotiate with you and nobody else.
• POSSIBLE for a short period of time.

Question 15

Petromec Inc v Petroleo Brasiliero SA [2005] EWCA Civ 891, [2006] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 121

Answer 15

Lock in – locking yourself in that you will reach an agreement – NOT possible.

Question 16

Blue v Ashley [2017] EWHC 1928 (Comm) (only in HC!)

Answer 16

• The court ruled there was no intention to create legal relation. Something of this magnitude should not be expected to make a contract like that as the contract was made in a pub.
• The social setting can make difference.

Question 17

Balfour v Balfour [1919] 2 KB 571

Answer 17

• The contract law cannot enforce a family matter.
• Contract law is all about risk, autonomy of individuals, and contribution of political arena.

Question 18

Esso Petroleum Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise 1976 1 All ER 117

Answer 18

Esso offered customers who purchased at least 4 gallons of petrol a ‚free’ promotional ‘World Cup Coin’. The coin had very little value. The Commissioner argued that the coin should be chargeable.

Question 19

Treitel

Answer 19

An acceptance is a final and unqualified expression of assent to the terms of the offer. Mirror image rule.

Question 20

Williams v Carwardine

Answer 20

The motive for acceptance is irrelevant.

Question 21

Requirements for acceptance

Answer 21

1) mirror rule 2) made by the offeree 3) in response to the offer 4) communicated to the offeror

Question 22

Boulton v Jones

Answer 22

acceptance must be made by the offeree

Question 23

Tinn v Hoffman

Answer 23

2 identical cross offers made ignorance of each other does not form a contract unless one accepts.

Question 24

Proton Energy v Public Company

Answer 24

The word ‘confirmed’ in email is enough to constitute acceptance.

Question 25

Hartog v Shields

Answer 25

what reasonable observer would think that the offeree intended to accept the offer.

Question 26

Powell v Lee

Answer 26

Acceptance can be made through a third party communication

Question 27

Brogden v Metropolitan Railway

Answer 27

Acceptance can be by conduct. There must be external evidence that suggest that a reasonable person with an intention to accept.

Question 28

Entores v Miles Far East Corporation

Answer 28

Acceptance by instantaneous communications; When the communication is received by the offeror. Lord Denning - example of shouting offer and acceptance across a river.

Question 29

Re Selectmove

Answer 29

Obiter: If the offeree stated that not heard for a certain period of time and should be taken as acceptance, it is acceptance.

Question 30

Vitol SA v Norelf

Answer 30

Silence could amount to acceptance as long as it can be regarded as ‘clear and unequivocal’.

Question 31

Byrne v Tienhoven

Answer 31

The offeror cannot revode the offer after the acceptance is posted even if the offeror is unaware of that.

Question 32

Household Fire and Carriage Accident Insurance Co v Grant

Answer 32

The acceptance is still valid, even if the letter is lost or destroyed in the post.

Question 33

Henthorn Fraser

Answer 33

If it is not reasonable to use the post, then the postal rule will not apply. (e.g. a postal strike is one)

Question 34

Holwell Securities v Hughes

Answer 34

Parties can use ‘ouster clauses’ to avoid postal rule. Parties can specify the mode of communication they want in writing. Postal rule will not apply if the party does not intend to apply or it would cause inconvenience and absurdity.

Question 35

Brinkibon

Answer 35

If the offeree has done all the offeree might reasonably be expected to do to get their message through, acceptance takes effect when the offeree might reasonably expect it to have been communicated to the offeror. Lord Fraser - an acceptance sent by Telex directly from the acceptor’s office to the offeror’s office should be treated as if it were an instantaneous communication, like a telephone conversation.

Question 36

The Brimnes

Answer 36

If acceptance is received within office hours but the offeror does not read it, counted as received.

Question 37

Mondial Shipping BV v Astarte Shipping; Brinkibon

Answer 37

If acceptance received outside office hours, it counts as having received at the beginning of the next working day.

Question 38

Thomas v BPE Solicitors

Answer 38

To define ‘ordinary office hour’, the context of parties’ negotiations and business norms are relevant.