Instantaneous: This covers situations where parties are in direct contact i.e Face-to-Face, telephone, telex, fax, instant messagine, e-mail, sms. In these situaitons acceptance is only valid via these methods when the accpetance has been "clearly heard and understood". This next case is in relation to telex. In the case of "Entores v Miles Far East Corp", the offeror was in London and the offeree was in Amsterdam. It was held the acceptance was only valid when it was received in London. AO2: Lord Denning stated in his famous aeroplane speech... 2 people in a courtyard, one shouts an offer to the other, aircraft flies over head, only accepted when it is heard without interference. The HofL confirmed this as good law in "The Brinkibon". In this case there was a telex acceptance from London to Vienna received in office hours. It was held that the contract was valid in Vienna. AO2: The HofL suggested the decision may have been different if the telex was received out of office hours. No guidelines are given. It seems logical that acceptance is valid when the office re-opens. This same principle applies to e-mails and faxes and all the modern methods. Problems can arise if the e-mail/fax is sent but not read by the recipient. It is logical to conclude that it is valid when it is read. The law is regulated via 2 EU regulations. The consumer protection regulations: The consumer can return goods within 7 days and the service provider must show the price, description, and delivery details. This applies to all contracts made via phone, fax, internet, mail order, TV shopping.The E-Commerce Regulations (Business done on the internet): The service providers must "always acknowledge customers orders without undue delay". A case to illustrate this is "The Kodak Case". This case stated tha internet items are ITT's, a customer's order amounts to an offer, an automatic e-mail doesn't equal acceptance. Acceptance is only valid when a 2nd e-mail has been sent to confirm goods have been despatched.