LW1109 Flashcards
unilateral agreement case. Influenza, Plaintiff carried out specific performance which served as agreement which became valid consideration
carlill v Carbolic smoke ball (1893)
case that showed the distinction between offer and invitation to treat. This case was ruled as invitation to treat.
pharmaceutical Society of great Britain V Boots (1953)
exception, case where the offer was clear, definite and left nothing for negotiation. Offer went beyond invitation to treat.
Lefkowitz v Great minneapolis surplus store [1957]
implied terms, where silence is not always considered an acceptance to an offer
felthouse v Bindley [1862]
postal rule : states that acceptance is valid at the time and place it was posted, not upon receipt
kelly v cruise catering ltd [1994]
instantaneous communication, acceptance become valid when the offer is received by the offeror
entores v miles far east corporation [1955]
battle of forms, where 2 parties are negotiating terms and both are setting there own terms and conditions wanting them to prevail in the end
butler machine tool v ex-cell op [1979]
consideration is valid , because the plaintiff’s participation in the publicity event was seenm by the courts as promotion for ryanair
O’keeffe V Ryanair [2003]
landmark case where the court found consideration when they nephew refrained from his vices , which was sufficient to support the promise made by the uncle
Hamer v Sidway [1891]
prayers arent enough for consideration in a legal contract.
O’Neil V Murphy
past consideration= no consideration, crew members were offered more money if they completed the full voyage, captain then said he wouldn’t pay
Stilk v myrick [1809]
consideration is valid if it provides a practical benefit for the main contractor.
Williams v Roffey Bros [1991]
no consideration because the tax colector did not have enough authority to change the contract. William v roffey bros was only valid for work done or good supplied not debts
Re Selectmove [1995]
pinnel’s case [1602]
payment of debts. If someone owes a certain amount of money, they cannot discharge that debt by merely paid in lesser amounts, unless there is some additional consideration provided by the creditor.
Roger V smtih
Legal intent, it is presumed that family , domestic or social relationships are parties which do no have an intention of creating a legal intent
When can this presumption [ it is presumed that family , domestic or social relationships are parties which do no have an intention of creating a legal intent] be rebutted
if there are factors like agreement being put in writing, the precision of terms and the presence of payment
commercial arrangements are presumed to have intention to create legal relations
edward v skyward ltd [1964]
case that introduced the innominate terms, spoke about seaworthiness. There was breach of contract however the breach wasn’t so bad that it would result with the termination of the contract.
hong kong fir shipping v kawasaki kisen [1962]
an innominate term where some of the citrus pellets were damged
cehave v brenner [1975]
terms implied in fact , business efficacy test. the seller wanted to gift the Adjacent land after contract
gardner v coutts [1967]
implied terms in fact, where the officious bystander was used to determine whether both parties intended those terms in the party. In this case the court implied that the partied where not intended for the term
carna foods v eagle star insurance [1997]
anothe business efficacy test where the courts ruled that both parties had obligation which were not explicitly stated but they were implied by the courts
butler v Alpine
term implied in law —- common law , terms which were implied by courts based on established legal principles. Tenant should have reasonable access to property, including working elevators and well-maintained common areas
liverpool city council v Irwin
