Contract Law

Question 1

What happened in the case of Gibson v Manchester City Council 1978?

Answer 1

Gibson filled in a form from the council that meant that he ‘may’ be able to get a mortgage to buy his council house, under a Conservative Party scheme. Following negotiation, Gibson asked the council to proceed with the purchase and council removed Gibson from their list of tenants. Following a political change to the Labour Party, the sale was halted. There was no contract as the wording ‘may be able to sell’ in the original letter did not constitute an offer capable of acceptance.

Question 2

What case is this ? Gibson filled in a form from the council that meant that he ‘may’ be able to get a mortgage to buy his council house, under a Conservative Party scheme. Following negotiation, Gibson asked the council to proceed with the purchase and council removed Gibson from their list of tenants. Following a political change to the Labour Party, the sale was halted. There was no contract as the wording ‘may be able to sell’ in the original letter did not constitute an offer capable of acceptance.

Answer 2

Gibson v Manchester City Council 1978

Question 3

What topic does the case of Gibson v Manchester City council relate to ?

Answer 3

Contract formation - offer and acceptance.

Question 4

What happened in the case of Partridge v Crittenden 1968 ?

Answer 4

D placed an advertisement in a magazine stating ‘bramble finch cocks, bramble finch hens 25s each’. He was prosecuted under the Protection of birds act 1954 for ‘offering for sale ‘ wild birds. Advertisement was an invitation to treat and not to offer and it was an expression of willingness to receive offers as the stating point of negotiations.

Question 5

What case is this ? D placed an advertisement in a magazine stating ‘bramble finch cocks, bramble finch hens 25s each’. He was prosecuted under the Protection of birds act 1954 for ‘offering for sale ‘ wild birds. Advertisement was an invitation to treat and not to offer and it was an expression of willingness to receive offers as the stating point of negotiations.

Answer 5

Partridge v Crittenden 1968

Question 6

What topic does the case of Partridge v Crittenden 1968 relate to ?

Answer 6

contract formation - offer and acceptance - advertisements

Question 7

What happened in the case of carlil v carbolic smoke ball company 1893 ?

Answer 7

D sold a patent medicine called a smoke ball. D placed a newspaper advertisement stating that they would pay £100 to anyone who caught flu after using the ball correctly for two weeks. C used the ball yet caught flu and sought the promise £100. D argued the advertisement was a ‘mere puff’ and that it wasn’t a real offer as one could not be made to the entire world.Advertisement was a unilateral offer to the world at large which was accepted by C. This unilateral offer waived the need for communication of acceptance prior to a claim being made on the basis of it. C was successful. This idea was later applied to reward cases – Williams v Carwardine.

Question 8

What case is this ? D sold a patent medicine called a smoke ball. D placed a newspaper advertisement stating that they would pay £100 to anyone who caught flu after using the ball correctly for two weeks. C used the ball yet caught flu and sought the promise £100. D argued the advertisement was a ‘mere puff’ and that it wasn’t a real offer as one could not be made to the entire world.Advertisement was a unilateral offer to the world at large which was accepted by C.
This unilateral offer waived the need for communication of acceptance prior to a claim being made on the basis of it. C was successful. This idea was later applied to reward cases – Williams v Carwardine

Answer 8

Carlil v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company 1893

Question 9

What topic does the case of Carlil v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company 1893 relate to ?

Answer 9

Contract formation - offer and acceptance - advertisements - unilateral offer

Question 10

What happened in the case of Fisher v Bell 1961 ?

Answer 10

A shopkeeper displayed a flick knife in his window. the offensive weapons act 1959 prohibited the ‘offering for sale’ of various offensive weapons, including flick knifes. Shopkeeper was prosecuted under the act. The prosecution failed. Court held that the display of the knife in the window was an invitation to treat rather than an offer. Therefore, the shopkeeper was not offering it for sale.

Question 11

What case is this ? A shopkeeper displayed a flick knife in his window. the offensive weapons act 1959 prohibited the ‘offering for sale’ of various offensive weapons, including flick knifes. Shopkeeper was prosecuted under the act. The prosecution failed. Court held that the display of the knife in the window was an invitation to treat rather than an offer. Therefore, the shopkeeper was not offering it for sale.

Answer 11

Fisher v Bell 1961

Question 12

What topic does the case of Fisher v Bell 1961 relate to ?

Answer 12

Contract formation - offer and acceptance - advertisements - goods in a shop window or shop shelf.

Question 13

What happened in the case of Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists Ltd 1953 ?

Answer 13

D changed the format of their shop from counter services to self service. Section 18 of the pharmacy and Poisons act 1933 provided that the sale of certain drugs should not occur ‘other than under the supervision of a registered pharmacist’.
Products on a shelf represented an invitation to treat rather than an offer of sale.

Question 14

What case is this ? D changed the format of their shop from counter services to self service. Section 18 of the pharmacy and Poisons act 1933 provided that the sale of certain drugs should not occur ‘other than under the supervision of a registered pharmacist’.
Products on a shelf represented an invitation to treat rather than an offer of sale.

Answer 14

Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists Ltd (1953)

Question 15

What topic does the case of Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists Ltd (1953) relate to ?

Answer 15

Contract formation - offer and acceptance - goods in a shop window or shop shelf.

Question 16

What happened in the case of British Car Auctions v Wright 1972 ?

Answer 16

Auctioneers (C) were charged with selling cars that were unroadworthy. D brought claim against C by saying that it was illegal to sell such a vehicle under the Road Traffic Act 1972.

Auctions are generally an invtation to treat, but when there is a condition that the highest bidder would get the product (Without reserve), then it is a unilateral offer. But that was not the case here so C was not liable.

Question 17

What case is this ? Auctioneers (C) were charged with selling cars that were unroadworthy. D brought claim against C by saying that it was illegal to sell such a vehicle under the Road Traffic Act 1972.

Auctions are generally an invtation to treat, but when there is a condition that the highest bidder would get the product (Without reserve), then it is a unilateral offer. But that was not the case here so C was not liable.

Answer 17

British Car Auctions v Wright 1972

Question 18

What topic does the case of British Car Auctions v Wright 1972 relate to ?

Answer 18

Contract formation - offer and acceptance - lots at an auction

Question 19

What happened in the case of Harvey v Facey 1893 ?

Answer 19

C sent a telegram to D which stated - “will you sell us Bumper Hall pen ? Telegraph lowest cash price - answered paid” . D replied to the telegram - “Lowest price for Bumper hall pen £900”
Harvey then replied - “we agree to buy Bumper Hall pen for the sum of nine hundred pounds asked by you. Please send us your title deed in order that we may get early possession “. There had been no offer.
The Privy Council held that there was no contract reached between the parties.
D had not directly answered the first question as to whether they would sell and the lowest price stated was merely responding to a request for information not an offer.

Question 20

What case is this ? C sent a telegram to D which stated - “will you sell us Bumper Hall pen ? Telegraph lowest cash price - answered paid” . D replied to the telegram - “Lowest price for Bumper hall pen £900”
Harvey then replied - “we agree to buy Bumper Hall pen for the sum of nine hundred pounds asked by you. Please send us your title deed in order that we may get early possession “. There had been no offer.
The Privy Council held that there was no contract reached between the parties.
D had not directly answered the first question as to whether they would sell and the lowest price stated was merely responding to a request for information not an offer.

Answer 20

Harvey v Facey 1893

Question 21

What topic does the case of Harvey v facey 1893 relate to ?

Answer 21

contract formation - offer and acceptance, a request for information.

Question 22

What happened in the case of Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking 1971 ?

Answer 22

C was injured in a car park partly due to the D’s negligence. C was given a ticket on entering the car park after putting money into a machine. The ticket stated the contract of parking was subject to terms and conditions which were displayed on the inside of the car park. One of the terms excluded liability for personal injuries arising through negligence. The question for the court was whether the term was incorporated into the contract, so had D brought it to the attention of C before or at the time the contract was made. This depended upon where the offer and acceptance took place in relation to the machine.
The machine itself constituted the offer.The acceptance was by putting the money into the machine. The ticket was dispensed after the acceptance took place and therefore the clause was not incorporated into the contract.

Question 23

What case is this ? C was injured in a car park partly due to the D’s negligence. C was given a ticket on entering the car park after putting money into a machine. The ticket stated the contract of parking was subject to terms and conditions which were displayed on the inside of the car park. One of the terms excluded liability for personal injuries arising through negligence. The question for the court was whether the term was incorporated into the contract, so had D brought it to the attention of C before or at the time the contract was made. This depended upon where the offer and acceptance took place in relation to the machine.
The machine itself constituted the offer.The acceptance was by putting the money into the machine. The ticket was dispensed after the acceptance took place and therefore the clause was not incorporated into the contract.

Answer 23

Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking 1971

Question 24

What topic does the case of Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking 1971 relate to ?

Answer 24

Contract formation - offer and acceptance, who can make an offer.

Question 25

What happened in the case of Taylor v Laird 1856 ?

Answer 25

C was employed as the captain of a ship which was owned by D. Whilst in a foreign port during the course of the voyage, C voluntarily gave up his position as captain, and worked as an ordinary crew member during his passage back to Britain. D was not made aware of this change of position. Upon his return, C sought to claim wages from D for his work as a crew member during this journey.C was not entitled to wages for the return journey on the basis that he had not entered into any contractual agreement with the D for the performance of his work as an ordinary crew member. D had not received any communication or offer of work in this capacity from C, and there was therefore no basis for a contract. Court reasoned that it would be unjust to bind a party to an offer which he had not been made aware of, and therefore had no opportunity to accept or reject; as such it is not possible in English contract law to accept an offer ‘in ignorance’.

Question 26

What case is this ? C was employed as the captain of a ship which was owned by D. Whilst in a foreign port during the course of the voyage, C voluntarily gave up his position as captain, and worked as an ordinary crew member during his passage back to Britain. D was not made aware of this change of position. Upon his return, C sought to claim wages from D for his work as a crew member during this journey.C was not entitled to wages for the return journey on the basis that he had not entered into any contractual agreement with the D for the performance of his work as an ordinary crew member. D had not received any communication or offer of work in this capacity from C, and there was therefore no basis for a contract. Court reasoned that it would be unjust to bind a party to an offer which he had not been made aware of, and therefore had no opportunity to accept or reject; as such it is not possible in English contract law to accept an offer ‘in ignorance’.

Answer 26

Taylor v Laird 1856

Question 26

What topic does the case of Taylor v Laird 1856 relate to ?

Answer 26

Contract formation - offer and acceptance, Who can make an offer

Question 27

What happened in the case of Routledge v Grant 1828 ?

Answer 27

D made an offer to buy C’s house, the offer to remain open for six weeks. D decided not to buy the house three weeks later and told C he was withdrawing his offer. Two weeks later, C tried to accept the offer. Principle (Ratio decidendi):The court decided that because the offer had been withdrawn it could not be accepted.

Question 28

What case is this ? D made an offer to buy C’s house, the offer to remain open for six weeks. D decided not to buy the house three weeks later and told C he was withdrawing his offer. Two weeks later, C tried to accept the offer. Principle (Ratio decidendi):The court decided that because the offer had been withdrawn it could not be accepted.

Answer 28

Routledge v Grant 1828

Question 29

What topic does the case of Routledge v Grant 1828 relate to ?

Answer 29

Contract formation - offer and acceptance, Revocation - ending an offer.

Question 30

What happened in the case of Dickinson v Dodds 1876 ?

Answer 30

D offered to sell his house to C and promised to keep the offer open until Friday. On the Thursday D accepted an offer from a 3rd party to purchase the house. D then asked a friend to tell C that the offer was withdrawn. On hearing the news, the C went round to the D's house first thing Friday morning to accept the offer. He then brought an action seeking specific performance of the contract.Principle (Ratio decidendi):Offer had been effectively revoked. so no contract existed between the parties. No obligation to keep the offer open until Friday since C had provided no consideration in exchange for the promise.

Question 31

What case is this ? D offered to sell his house to C and promised to keep the offer open until Friday. On the Thursday D accepted an offer from a 3rd party to purchase the house. D then asked a friend to tell C that the offer was withdrawn. On hearing the news, the C went round to the D's house first thing Friday morning to accept the offer. He then brought an action seeking specific performance of the contract.Principle (Ratio decidendi):Offer had been effectively revoked. so no contract existed between the parties. No obligation to keep the offer open until Friday since C had provided no consideration in exchange for the promise.

Answer 31

Dickinson v Dodds 1876

Question 32

What topic does the case of Dickinson v Dodds 1876 relate to ?

Answer 32

Contract formation - offer and acceptance, Revocation - ending an offer.

Question 33

What happened in the case of Hyde v Wrench 1840 ?

Answer 33

facts:D offered to sell a farm to C for '£1000'. C in reply offered '£950' which the D refused. C then sought to accept the original offer of '£1000'. D refused to sell to C and the C brought an action for specific performance.Principle (Ratio decidendi):There was no contract. Where a counter offer is made this destroys the original offer so that it is no longer open to the offeree to accept.

Question 34

What case is this ? facts:D offered to sell a farm to C for '£1000'. C in reply offered '£950' which the D refused. C then sought to accept the original offer of '£1000'. D refused to sell to C and the C brought an action for specific performance.Principle (Ratio decidendi):There was no contract. Where a counter offer is made this destroys the original offer so that it is no longer open to the offeree to accept.

Answer 34

Hyde v Wrench 1840

Question 35

What topic does the case of Hyde v Wrench 1840 relate to ?

Answer 35

Contract formation - offer and acceptance - offer ending - rejection (counter offer)

Question 36

What happened in the case of Ramsgate Victoria Hotel v Montefiore 1866 ?

Answer 36

C had offered to buy shares in the D’s company in June, but the D did not issues the shares for sale until November. Offers lapse after a ‘reasonable time’. What is to be deemed reasonable will depend on the circumstances. In this case the fluctuating nature of shares was a deciding factor.

Question 37

What case is this ? C had offered to buy shares in the D’s company in June, but the D did not issues the shares for sale until November. Offers lapse after a ‘reasonable time’. What is to be deemed reasonable will depend on the circumstances. In this case the fluctuating nature of shares was a deciding factor.

Answer 37

Ramsgate Victoria Hotel v Montefiore 1866.

Question 38

What topic does the case of Ramsgate Victoria Hotel v Montefiore 1866 ?

Answer 38

Contract Formation - offer and acceptance - offer ending - lapse of time.

Question 39

What cases relate to Death of an offeror ?

Answer 39

Bradbury v Morgan 1862 .

Question 40

What topic does the case of Bradbury v Morgan 1862 relate to ?

Answer 40

Contract formation - offer and acceptance - death of an offeror - ending an offer.

Question 41

What case relates to the death of the offeree ?

Answer 41

Reynolds v Atherton 1921

Question 42

What topic does the case of Reynolds v Atherton relate to ?

Answer 42

contract formation - offer and acceptance - ending a contract - death of an offeree.

Question 43

What happened in the case of Felthouse v Brindley 1863 ?

Answer 43

A nephew discussed buying a horse from his uncle (C). He offered to purchase the horse and said “if I don't hear from you by the weekend I will consider him mine”. The horse was then sold by mistake at auction. The auctioneer (D) had been asked not to sell the horse but had forgotten. C sued D for conversion (civil equivalent of theft). The action depended upon whether a valid contract existed between the C and his nephew. HELD: There was no contract.

Question 44

What case is this ? A nephew discussed buying a horse from his uncle (C). He offered to purchase the horse and said “if I don't hear from you by the weekend I will consider him mine”. The horse was then sold by mistake at auction. The auctioneer (D) had been asked not to sell the horse but had forgotten. C sued D for conversion (civil equivalent of theft). The action depended upon whether a valid contract existed between the C and his nephew. HELD: There was no contract.

Answer 44

Felthouse v Brindley 1863

Question 45

What topic does the case of Felthouse v Brindley 1863 relate to ?

Answer 45

Contract formation - offer and acceptance - how can acceptance be made?

Question 46

What happened in the case of Reveille independent v Anotech 2016 ?

Answer 46

Reveille © was a company which produced TV programs. This included the US version of Gordon Ramsey’s MasterChef. C began negotiating with Anotech (D), a cookware company, to feature D’s product on the show and allow D to use the MasterChef brand. An offer was made but D made alterations to the contract before signing it (counteroffer). Contract remained unsigned by the C however C began including D’s products in MasterChef. Contract terms were performed by both parties and therefore became binding - Acceptance through conduct.

Question 47

What case is this ? Reveille © was a company which produced TV programs. This included the US version of Gordon Ramsey’s MasterChef. C began negotiating with Anotech (D), a cookware company, to feature D’s product on the show and allow D to use the MasterChef brand. An offer was made but D made alterations to the contract before signing it (counteroffer). Contract remained unsigned by the C however C began including D’s products in MasterChef. Contract terms were performed by both parties and therefore became binding - Acceptance through conduct.

Answer 47

Reveille Independent v Anotech (2016)

Question 48

What topic does the case of Reveille Independent v Anotech (2016) relate to?

Answer 48

Contract formation - offer and acceptance - acceptance by conduct.

Question 49

What happened in the case of brogan v Metropolitan Railway Co 1877 ?

Answer 49

C were the suppliers of coal to D railway company. Had been dealing for some years on an informal basis with no written contract. Parties agreed that it would be wise to have a formal contract written. D drew up a draft contract and sent it to C. C made some minor amendments and filled in some blanks and sent it back to D. D then simply filed the document and never communicated their acceptance to the contract. Throughout this period C continued to supply the coal. Subsequently a dispute arose and it was questioned whether in fact the written agreement was valid.The written contract was valid despite no communication of the acceptance. The acceptance took place by performing the contract without any objection to the terms.

Question 50

What case is this ? C were the suppliers of coal to D railway company. Had been dealing for some years on an informal basis with no written contract. Parties agreed that it would be wise to have a formal contract written. D drew up a draft contract and sent it to C. C made some minor amendments and filled in some blanks and sent it back to D. D then simply filed the document and never communicated their acceptance to the contract. Throughout this period C continued to supply the coal. Subsequently a dispute arose and it was questioned whether in fact the written agreement was valid.The written contract was valid despite no communication of the acceptance. The acceptance took place by performing the contract without any objection to the terms.

Answer 50

Brodgen v. Metropolitan Railway Co [1877]

Question 51

What topic does the case of Brodgen v. Metropolitan Railway Co [1877] relate to ?

Answer 51

Contract formation - offer and acceptance - acceptance by conduct.

Question 52

What happened in the case of Fitch v Snedaker 1868 ?

Answer 52

A unilateral offer (a reward) was made by D to anyone who could find their dog. C found and returned it to D without being aware of the offer made by the D. Legal point: C was not entitled to the reward because acceptance of an offer, in ignorance of that offer, is not acceptance.

Question 53

What case is this ? A unilateral offer (a reward) was made by D to anyone who could find their dog. C found and returned it to D without being aware of the offer made by the D. Legal point: C was not entitled to the reward because acceptance of an offer, in ignorance of that offer, is not acceptance.

Answer 53

Fitch v Snedaker (1868)

Question 54

What topic does the case of Fitch v Snedaker (1868) relate to ?

Answer 54

Contract formation - offer and acceptance - acceptance in ignorance of the offer - NOT ACCEPTANCE.

Question 55

What happened in the case of Adams v Lindsey 1818 ?

Answer 55

D wrote to C offering to sell them some wool and asking for a reply 'in the course of post'. Letter was delayed in the post. On receiving the letter C posted a letter of acceptance the same day. However, due to the delay D had assumed C was not interested in the wool and sold it on to a third party. C sued for breach of contract. Holding: There was a valid contract which came into existence the moment the letter of acceptance was placed in the post box.This case established the postal rule. The acceptance becomes effective when the letter is posted where:Post is the agreed form of communication between the parties The letter of acceptance is correctly addressed and carries the right postage stampThe Offeree can prove that the letter was posted.

Question 56

What case is this ? D wrote to C offering to sell them some wool and asking for a reply 'in the course of post'. Letter was delayed in the post. On receiving the letter C posted a letter of acceptance the same day. However, due to the delay D had assumed C was not interested in the wool and sold it on to a third party. C sued for breach of contract. Holding: There was a valid contract which came into existence the moment the letter of acceptance was placed in the post box.This case established the postal rule. The acceptance becomes effective when the letter is posted where:Post is the agreed form of communication between the parties .The letter of acceptance is correctly addressed and carries the right postage stampThe Offeree can prove that the letter was posted.

Answer 56

Adams v Lindsey 1818

Question 57

What topic does the case of Adams v Lindsey 1818 relate to ?

Answer 57

Contract formation - offer and acceptance - acceptance by post

Question 58

How does the case of Henthorn v Fraser 1892 relate to the 'postal rules' ?

Answer 58

It means that acceptance by post must have been requested or in the circumstances be normal, reasonable and anticipated.

Question 59

What topic does the case of Henthorn v Fraser 1892 relate to ?

Answer 59

The postal rules - acceptance and offers - contracts formation.

Question 60

How does the case of Re London And Northern Bank, ex parte Jones 1990 relate to the 'postal rules' ?

Answer 60

It shows that a letter must be properly stamped and addressed.

Question 61

What topic does the case of Re London And Northern Bank, ex parte Jones 1990 relate to ?

Answer 61

Postal rules - contract formation - offer and acceptance.

Question 62

How does the case of Holwell Securities v Hughes 1974 relate to the postal rules ?

Answer 62

It makes sure that the use of postal services must not create manifest inconvenience or absurdity.

Question 63

what topic does the case of Howell Securities v Hughes 1974 relate to ?

Answer 63

Contract formation - offer and acceptance - postal rules.

Question 64

How does the case of Household fire insurance Co v Grant 1879 relate to the postal rules ?

Answer 64

It makes sure that even if the letter of acceptance is never received by the the offeror it is still binding.

Question 65

What topic does the case of Household Fire Insurance Co v Grant 1879 relate to ?

Answer 65

Postal rules - contract formation - offer and acceptance.

Question 66

What happened in the case of Entores v Miles Far East 1955 ?

Answer 66

C sent a telex message from England offering to purchase 100 tons of Cathodes from the D in Holland.D sent back a telex from Holland to the London office accepting that offer. Instantaneous communication: Normal rules on acceptance applied. Acceptance occurs when the offeror becomes aware of it.

Question 67

What case is this ? C sent a telex message from England offering to purchase 100 tons of Cathodes from the D in Holland.D sent back a telex from Holland to the London office accepting that offer. Instantaneous communication: Normal rules on acceptance applied. Acceptance occurs when the offeror becomes aware of it.

Answer 67

Entores v Miles Far East (1955)

Question 68

What topic does the case of Entores v Miles Far East (1955) relate to ?

Answer 68

contract formation - offer and acceptance - postal rules.

Question 69

What happened in the case of Brinkibon Ltd v Stahag Stahl 1938 ?

Answer 69

An acceptance was sent by telex but arrived out of office hours. Acceptance took effect at the start of the next working day. BUT…no universal rule can cover every case and therefore each should be taken on its own facts and with reference to the intention of the parties.

Question 70

What case is this ? An acceptance was sent by telex but arrived out of office hours. Acceptance took effect at the start of the next working day. BUT…no universal rule can cover every case and therefore each should be taken on its own facts and with reference to the intention of the parties.

Answer 70

Brinkibon Ltd. v Stahag Stahl (1983)

Question 71

What topic does the case of Brinkibon Ltd. v Stahag Stahl (1983) relate to ?

Answer 71

Contract formation - offer and acceptance - Acceptance By Electronic Methods Of Communication (Instantaneous) Out Of Hours Communication.

Question 72

What happened in the case of Sadler v Reynolds 2005 ?

Answer 72

Alleged contract between a journalist and a businessman who were friends. Journalist wanted to ghost-write the autobiography of the businessman. Judge suggested that the agreement fell ‘somewhere between an obviously commercial transaction and a social exchange. Burden was on the journalist to prove that there was an ICLR.

Question 73

What case is this ? Alleged contract between a journalist and a businessman who were friends. Journalist wanted to ghost-write the autobiography of the businessman. Judge suggested that the agreement fell ‘somewhere between an obviously commercial transaction and a social exchange. Burden was on the journalist to prove that there was an ICLR.

Answer 73

Sadler v Reynolds 2005

Question 74

What topic does the case of Sadler v George 2005 relate to ?

Answer 74

ICLR - Domestic or business agreement.

Question 75

What happened in the case of Jones v Vernon Pools 1938 ?

Answer 75

Mr Jones claimed that he had a winning football pool coupon. The coupon, which he signed, stated that the transaction was ‘binding in honour only’. As the agreement was based on honour of the parties and not legally binding, there was no ICLR and no contract. Honour Clause Principle.

Question 76

What case is this ? Mr Jones claimed that he had a winning football pool coupon. The coupon, which he signed, stated that the transaction was ‘binding in honour only’. As the agreement was based on honour of the parties and not legally binding, there was no ICLR and no contract. Honour Clause Principle.

Answer 76

Jones v Vernons Pools 1938

Question 77

What topic does the case of Jones v Vernon Pools 1938 relate to ?

Answer 77

ICLR - commercial / business agreements

Question 78

What happened in the case of Esso Petroleum Co. Ltd v Commissioners and excise 1976 ?

Answer 78

Esso ran a promotion whereby any person purchasing four gallons of petrol would get a free coin from their World Cup Coins Collection. The question for the court was whether these coins were 'produced in quantity for general resale' if so they would be subject to tax and Esso would be liable to pay £200,000. Esso argued that the coins were simply a free gift and the promotion was not intended to have legal effect and also that there was no resale. There was an ICLR. The coins were offered in a commercial context which raised a presumption that they did intend to be bound. However, the coins were not exchanged for a money consideration and therefore the coins were not for resale.

Question 79

What case is this ? Esso ran a promotion whereby any person purchasing four gallons of petrol would get a free coin from their World Cup Coins Collection. The question for the court was whether these coins were 'produced in quantity for general resale' if so they would be subject to tax and Esso would be liable to pay £200,000. Esso argued that the coins were simply a free gift and the promotion was not intended to have legal effect and also that there was no resale. There was an ICLR. The coins were offered in a commercial context which raised a presumption that they did intend to be bound. However, the coins were not exchanged for a money consideration and therefore the coins were not for resale.

Answer 79

Esso Petroleum Co. Ltd v Commissioners and excise (1976).

Question 80

What topic does the case of Esso Petroleum Co. Ltd v Commissioners and excise (1976) relate to ?

Answer 80

ICLR - commercial / business agreements - Free gifts and prizes.

Question 81

What happened in the case of McGowan v Radio Buxton 2001 ?

Answer 81

Ms. McGowan participated in a competition on a radio station for which the advertised prize was claimed to be a Renault Clio car. Ms. McGowan correctly identified the song on the radio and was informed that she won the competition. When she went to collect the car, the radio station gave her a plastic, toy model of the Clio car instead. Ms. McGowan sued. The radio station claimed the promotion was not a legally binding contract. The Court held that there was an ICLR and that, consequently, the competition and awarding of the prize was a legally binding agreement. The purpose of a promotion or competition is to promote the business which creates commercial advantages. Members of the public who enter into the competition ought to rely on this ICLR by the content of the agreement. Thus, Radio Buxton was legally bound to fulfil its promise and the Court awarded damages of the cost of a new Renault Clio to Ms. McGowan.

Question 82

What case is this ? Ms. McGowan participated in a competition on a radio station for which the advertised prize was claimed to be a Renault Clio car. Ms. McGowan correctly identified the song on the radio and was informed that she won the competition. When she went to collect the car, the radio station gave her a plastic, toy model of the Clio car instead. Ms. McGowan sued. The radio station claimed the promotion was not a legally binding contract. The Court held that there was an ICLR and that, consequently, the competition and awarding of the prize was a legally binding agreement. The purpose of a promotion or competition is to promote the business which creates commercial advantages. Members of the public who enter into the competition ought to rely on this ICLR by the content of the agreement. Thus, Radio Buxton was legally bound to fulfil its promise and the Court awarded damages of the cost of a new Renault Clio to Ms. McGowan.

Answer 82

McGowan v Radio Buxton 2001

Question 83

What topic does the case of McGowan v Radio Buxton 2001 relate to ?

Answer 83

ICLR- commercial / business agreements - free gifts and prizes .

Question 84

What topic does the case of Balfour v Balfour 1919 relate to in contract law ?

Answer 84

Social and domestic agreements in ICLR

Question 85

What topic does the case of Merritt v Merritt 1970 relate to in contract law ?

Answer 85

Social and domestic agreements - ICLR

Question 86

What happened in the case of Jones v Padavatton 1969 ?

Answer 86

Daughter agreed to give up her well paid job in New York to study law in England Mother promised her an allowance and bought a house for her to live in whilst she studied. Presumption stands No evidence the agreement was intended to be legally binding.

Question 87

What case is this ? Daughter agreed to give up her well paid job in New York to study law in England Mother promised her an allowance and bought a house for her to live in whilst she studied. Presumption stands No evidence the agreement was intended to be legally binding.

Answer 87

Jones v Padavatton 1969

Question 88

What topic does the case of Jones v Padavatton 1969 relate to ?

Answer 88

ICLR- social and domestic agreements.

Question 89

What happened in the case of Simpkins v Pays 1955 ?

Answer 89

D had entered into a competition jointly with her granddaughter and the claimant (her lodger) They won £750 but D refused to share the money. There was a binding contract despite the family connection as the lodger was also party to the contract. This rebutted the presumption of no ICLR.

Question 90

What case is this ? D had entered into a competition jointly with her granddaughter and the claimant (her lodger) They won £750 but D refused to share the money. There was a binding contract despite the family connection as the lodger was also party to the contract. This rebutted the presumption of no ICLR.

Answer 90

Simpkins v Pays 1955

Question 91

What topic does the case of Simpkins v Pays 1955 relate to ?

Answer 91

ICLR - social and domestic agreements

Question 92

What happened in the case of Parker v Clarke 1960 ?

Answer 92

Elderly couple suggested niece and her partner move in with them Niece & partner sold their home and moved in Elderly couple changed their minds and asked them to leave. Wording suggested legal intent. The sacrifice of the house elevated this agreement beyond merely social.

Question 93

What case is this ? Elderly couple suggested niece and her partner move in with them Niece & partner sold their home and moved in Elderly couple changed their minds and asked them to leave. Wording suggested legal intent. The sacrifice of the house elevated this agreement beyond merely social.

Answer 93

Parker v Clarke 1960.

Question 94

What topic does the case of Parker v Clarke 1960 relate to ?

Answer 94

ICLR - social and domestic agreements

Question 95

What happened in the case of Currie v Lisa 1975 ?

Answer 95

It is the case where consideration was defined as “some right, interest, profit or benefit accruing to the one party, or some detriment, loss or responsibility given by the other”.

Question 96

What case is this ? It is the case where consideration was defined as “some right, interest, profit or benefit accruing to the one party, or some detriment, loss or responsibility given by the other”.

Answer 96

Currie v Misa 1975

Question 97

What topic does the case of Currie v Lisa 1975 relate to ?

Answer 97

consideration

Question 98

What are the four maxims of consideration ?

Answer 98

1.Consideration need not be adequate but must be sufficient 2.Past consideration is not good consideration 3.Consideration must move from the promisee 4.Performing an existing duty cannot be the consideration for a new contract a) Public duty b) A duty imposed under an existing contract c) A promise to make payment on an existing debt

Question 99

What happened in the case of Thomas v Thomas 1842 ?

Answer 99

A husband expressed a wish that after his death his wife should remain in the marital home. He did not put this into his will however the executors carried out the wish and charged the wife £1 a year in rent. Some time later the executors sought to remove the wife claiming there was no contract. The £1 a year ground rent was held to be valid consideration meaning a contract existed between the executors and the widow.

Question 100

What case is this ? A husband expressed a wish that after his death his wife should remain in the marital home. He did not put this into his will however the executors carried out the wish and charged the wife £1 a year in rent. Some time later the executors sought to remove the wife claiming there was no contract. The £1 a year ground rent was held to be valid consideration meaning a contract existed between the executors and the widow.

Answer 100

Thomas v Thomas 1842

Question 101

what topic does the case of Thomas v Thomas 1842 relate to ?

Answer 101

Consideration - first maxim - Consideration need not be adequate but must be sufficient.

Question 102

What happened in the case of Chapel v Nestle 1960 ?

Answer 102

Nestle ran a sales promotion whereby if persons sent in 3 chocolate bar wrappers and a postal order for 1 shilling 6d they would be sent a record. The question for the court was whether the chocolate bar wrappers formed part of the consideration. The wrappers did form part of the consideration as the object was to increase sales and therefore provided value. The fact that the wrappers were simply to be thrown away did not detract from this.

Question 103

What case is this ? Nestle ran a sales promotion whereby if persons sent in 3 chocolate bar wrappers and a postal order for 1 shilling 6d they would be sent a record. The question for the court was whether the chocolate bar wrappers formed part of the consideration. The wrappers did form part of the consideration as the object was to increase sales and therefore provided value. The fact that the wrappers were simply to be thrown away did not detract from this.

Answer 103

Chappel v Nestle 1960

Question 104

What topic does the case of Chappel v Nestle 1960 relate to ?

Answer 104

consideration - first maxim - Consideration need not be adequate but must be sufficient.

Question 105

What happened in the case of White v Bluett 1853 ?

Answer 105

A father lent money to his son and promised to write off the debt if the son stopped complaining about the way the father distributed property in his will. The father died and the estate executors sought to recover the debt from the son. Could ‘not complaining’ constitute good consideration for the promise of not needing to repay the debt. Such consideration cannot be of value in the eyes of the law; there is no right to complain.

Question 106

What is this case ? A father lent money to his son and promised to write off the debt if the son stopped complaining about the way the father distributed property in his will. The father died and the estate executors sought to recover the debt from the son. Could ‘not complaining’ constitute good consideration for the promise of not needing to repay the debt. Such consideration cannot be of value in the eyes of the law; there is no right to complain.

Answer 106

White v Bluett 1853

Question 107

What topic does the case of white v Bluett 1853 relate to ?

Answer 107

consideration - first maxim - real and tangible

Question 108

What happened in the case of Ward v Blytham 1956 ?

Answer 108

The father of the claimants child had promised the claimant (the mother) money towards the upkeep of the child if she would keep the child ‘well looked after and happy’. When the father stopped the money the mother sued him for the money. The father contended that the mother was doing no more than what she was already obligated to do. The court enforced the agreement holding that due to lack in law of a duty to keep a child happy, the promise to do so was good consideration.

Question 109

What case is this ? The father of the claimants child had promised the claimant (the mother) money towards the upkeep of the child if she would keep the child ‘well looked after and happy’. When the father stopped the money the mother sued him for the money. The father contended that the mother was doing no more than what she was already obligated to do. The court enforced the agreement holding that due to lack in law of a duty to keep a child happy, the promise to do so was good consideration.

Answer 109

Ward v Blytham 1956

Question 110

What topic does the case of Ward v Blytham 1956 relate to ?

Answer 110

consideration - first maxim - real and tangible.

Question 111

What happened in the case of Re McArdle 1951 ?

Answer 111

McArdle (C) carried out certain improvements and repairs on a bungalow. The bungalow formed part of the estate of her husband's father who had died leaving the property to his wife for life and then on trust for C's husband and his four siblings. After the work had been carried out the brothers and sisters signed a document stating in consideration of you carrying out the repairs we agree that the executors pay you £480 from the proceeds of sale. However, the payment was never made. Held: The promise to make payment came after the consideration had been performed therefore the promise to make payment was not binding. Past consideration is not valid.

Question 112

What case is this ? McArdle (C) carried out certain improvements and repairs on a bungalow. The bungalow formed part of the estate of her husband's father who had died leaving the property to his wife for life and then on trust for C's husband and his four siblings. After the work had been carried out the brothers and sisters signed a document stating in consideration of you carrying out the repairs we agree that the executors pay you £480 from the proceeds of sale. However, the payment was never made. Held: The promise to make payment came after the consideration had been performed therefore the promise to make payment was not binding. Past consideration is not valid.

Answer 112

Re McArdle 1951

Question 113

What topics does the case of Re McArdle 1951 relate to ?

Answer 113

consideration - second maxim - past consideration is no consideration.

Question 114

What happened in the case of Lamplight v Braithwaite 1615 ?

Answer 114

D had killed a man and was due to be hung for murder. He asked C to do everything in his power to obtain a pardon from the King. C went to great efforts and managed to get the pardon requested. D then promised to pay him £100 for his efforts but never paid up. The promise to make payment came after the performance and was therefore past consideration… However… The court held that C should receive the money because the performance was proceeded with a request.

Question 115

What case is this ? D had killed a man and was due to be hung for murder. He asked C to do everything in his power to obtain a pardon from the King. C went to great efforts and managed to get the pardon requested. D then promised to pay him £100 for his efforts but never paid up. The promise to make payment came after the performance and was therefore past consideration… However… The court held that C should receive the money because the performance was proceeded with a request.

Answer 115

Lamplight v Braithwaite 1615

Question 116

What topic does the case of Lampleigh v Braithwaite 1615 relate to ?

Answer 116

Consideration - second maxim - exception, implied consideration.

Question 117

What happened in the case of Re Casey's Patent 1892 ?

Answer 117

C worked on patents for a company. The company later promised hima ⅓ share in the patents. The company refused to had over the share of the patents on the basis that there was no contract as the consideration was past consideration. The court decided that C was entitled to the share.It was implied that when he worked on the patents he would receive some payment.

Question 118

What case is this ? C worked on patents for a company. The company later promised hima ⅓ share in the patents. The company refused to had over the share of the patents on the basis that there was no contract as the consideration was past consideration. The court decided that C was entitled to the share.It was implied that when he worked on the patents he would receive some payment.

Answer 118

Re Casey's Patent 1892

Question 119

What topic does the case of Re Casey's Patent 1892 relate to ?

Answer 119

Consideration - second maxim - exception (implied consent).

Question 120

What happened in the case of Tweddle v Atkinson 1861?

Answer 120

A couple were getting married. The father of the bride entered an agreement with the father of the groom that they would each pay the couple a sum of money. The father of the bride died without having paid. The father of the son also died so was unable to sue on the agreement. The groom made a claim against the executor of the will. Held: The claim failed. The groom was not a party (privy) to the agreement and the consideration did not move from him. Therefore he was not entitled to enforce the contract.

Question 121

What case is this ? A couple were getting married. The father of the bride entered an agreement with the father of the groom that they would each pay the couple a sum of money. The father of the bride died without having paid. The father of the son also died so was unable to sue on the agreement. The groom made a claim against the executor of the will. Held: The claim failed. The groom was not a party (privy) to the agreement and the consideration did not move from him. Therefore he was not entitled to enforce the contract.

Answer 121

Tweddle v Atkinson 1861

Question 122

What topic does the case of Tweddle v Atkinson 1861 relate to ?

Answer 122

consideration - third maxim - Consideration Must Move from the Promisee.

Question 123

What happened in the case of Collins v Godefroy 1831 ?

Answer 123

A policeman was under a court order to attend and give evidence at a trial. It was important to D that the policemen attended, so he promised to pay him some money. There was no consideration as the policeman was already under a duty to attend.

Question 124

What case is this ? A policeman was under a court order to attend and give evidence at a trial. It was important to D that the policemen attended, so he promised to pay him some money. There was no consideration as the policeman was already under a duty to attend.

Answer 124

Collins v Godefroy 1831

Question 125

What topic does the case of Collins v Godefroy 1831 relate to ?

Answer 125

consideration - forth maxim - Performing an existing duty cannot be the consideration for a new contract - Public Duty.

Question 126

What happened in the case of Glasbrook Bros v Glamorgan county council 1925 ?

Answer 126

During a strike a pit-owner asked for extra protection from the police. He wanted them to live on site. For this there would be payment. When the strike was over the pit owner refused to pay. As the police had provided more men and in a different way than they would normally have done, there was consideration. Payment owed.

Question 127

What case is this ? During a strike a pit-owner asked for extra protection from the police. He wanted them to live on site. For this there would be payment. When the strike was over the pit owner refused to pay. As the police had provided more men and in a different way than they would normally have done, there was consideration. Payment owed.

Answer 127

Glasbrook Bros v Glamorgan County Council (1925)

Question 128

What topic does the case of Glasbrook Bros v Glamorgan County Council (1925) relate to ?

Answer 128

consideration - fourth maxim - Performing an existing duty cannot be the consideration for a new contract - Public Duty.