Offer

View mindmap
  • OFFER
    • Unilateral contract
      • CARLILL V CARBOLIC SMOKE BALL COMPANY ((1893)
        • A promise to pay £100 to any purchaser who used the smoke ball correctly and got flu. Held - advertisment was a unilateral contract because it was an offer that could be accepted by anyone in this situation.
      • An offer made in exchange for an act.
    • Bilateral contract
      • A contract between 2 parties where each promises to perform an act in exchange for the other party's act.
    • Offer
      • Is an expression of willingness by an offeree to enter into a legally binding agreement base on the terms set out in the offer made by the offeror. The contract is formed when these terms are accepted.
    • Request for information
      • HARVELA INVESTMENTS V ROYAL TRUST OF CANADA (1986)
        • RToC invited 2 parties to bid for some land on the understanding that the highest bid would be accepted. 2 bids - RToC accepted Sir Leonard Outbridge's offer of $2,100,000 or $100,000 more than the highest bidder. Harvela was the other offeree and he sued RToC for breach on contract.
          • The wording of the invitation to tender made it an offer that could only be accepted by the highest bidder. The bid by Sir Leonard was ineffective as it defeats the purpose of asking for highest bids. He only bid £2,100,000 compared with Harvela's $2,175,000.
      • Public authorities are required to offer for tender for many of their services.
    • Invitation to treat
      • An indication of willingness to deal but not an intention to be bound.
    • Newspaper advertisment
      • Usually an invitation to treat, but can be an offer depending on the wording and conditions.
      • CARLILL V CARBOLIC SMOKE COMPANY (1893)
        • The wording was very specific and made it an offer
          • A promise to pay £100 to any purchaser who used the smoke ball correctly and got flu. Held - advertisment was a unilateral contract because it was an offer that could be accepted by anyone in this situation.
        • CARLILL V CARBOLIC SMOKE BALL COMPANY ((1893)
      • Withdrawal of the offer before acceptance
        • ROUTLEDGE V GRANT (1828)
          • Grant had offered his house for sale and it had a condition that it would remain open for 6wks. He took it off the market and the courts held that this was lawful as no-one had yet accepted the offer.
        • There is no legal commitment until a contact has been concluded by the acceptance of an offer and either party, up until that point is free to change their mind and withdraw.
      • Communication of the terms in the offer
        • GUTHING V LYNN (1831)
          • The buyer of a horse promised to pay the seller an extra £5 'if the horse is lucky for me'.
            • It was held that these terms were to vague to be enforceable.
        • The parties must know what they are agreeing to in the contact and therefore the terms mustn't be too vague.
      • Communication & knowledge of the offer
        • TAYLOR V LAIRD (1856)
          • Taylor needed a passage back to the UK after giving up his captaincy. Offered to work as an ordinary crew member. His claim for wages wasn't successful because the owner of the ship hadn't received communication of this offer.
            • It was held that there had to be knowledge of the offer in order for it to be accepted.
        • If the offerer doesn't have knowledge of the offer then it cannot be accepted.
      • Communication of withdrawal of offer to the offeree
        • BYRNE V VAN TIENHOVEN (1880)
          • B thinks a contact is in place, the court agrees. The fact that A revoked the order is irrelevant because B had accepted before receiving the revocation.
            • 1 Oct - A posts an order to B      8 Oct - A posts letter to B revoking the order         11 Oct - B receives As order           15 Oct - B replies, accepting the terms          20 Oct - B receives As revocation
              • BYRNE V VAN TIENHOVEN (1880)
                • B thinks a contact is in place, the court agrees. The fact that A revoked the order is irrelevant because B had accepted before receiving the revocation.
                  • 1 Oct - A posts an order to B      8 Oct - A posts letter to B revoking the order         11 Oct - B receives As order           15 Oct - B replies, accepting the terms          20 Oct - B receives As revocation
          • An offer remains open and cannot be considered withdrawn until the offeree has received it.
        • Communication of withdrawal of offer to offeree by 3rd party
          • DICKINSON V DODDS (1876)
            • Dodds offered to sell his house to Dickinson - left open until Friday pm. Thurs pm, Dickinson heard from a 3rd party that Dodds had sold the property to someone else. Friday am, Dickinson delivered an acceptance to Dodds, and then bought an action for specific performance against Dodds.
              • It was held that the offer made to Dickinson had been withdrawn on the Thurs and was no longer capable of acceptance. It was acceptable as it was a reliable 3rd party who had mutual acquaintance with both parties and could be relied upon.
          • If the offeror wants to withdraw the offer, communication of this need not to be done by the offeror themselves but can be communicated through a reliable 3rd party.

      Comments

      No comments have yet been made

      Similar Law resources:

      See all Law resources »See all Contract law resources »