There are certain situations where a contract will be concluded even though there isn't a clear offer and acceptance. This may be due to previous dealings and through parties conduct. In the case of "Brogden v Metropolitan Railway". In this case the railway company sent Brogden a written contract to sign, Brogden changed some of the terms producing a counter-offer, which Railways Co. filed away. It was held that there was a contract. Despite the counter-offer contract concluded as the parties still continued to trade.Battle of the Forms: This area of law refers to standard form contracts. These are used in businesses who want to save time by printing their terms on the back of stationery like delivery notes or order forms etc. The battle arises when during negotiations businesses respond on their own standard form contracts. This can be seen in the case of "Butler Machine Tool Co. v Ex-Cell-O-Corp". In this case an offer for a machine tool at £75K+ inflation, the buyer replied on his own standard form at £75K only, sellers signed buyers tear off slip. The contract concluded on the buyers terms.Collateral contracts: These contracts are "created" to avoid an injustice. A collateral contract is created when a party enters a contract with someone which they were induced into through a promise made by a third party. In the case of "Shanklin Pier v Detel Products". In this case a pier company employed a painter to paint the pier with a specific paint due to a promise made by Detel products. When the paint proved unstable, SP was able to sue Detel despite there not being a contract between them.Multi-Partite agreements: There are also used to create justice between parties despite there not being any clear offer and acceptance. This can be seen in the case "Clarke v Dunraven". In this case 2 yacht owners enter a regetta, and they signed an agreement with the club. They were told they had to pay all the damages caused by fouling (one rule), and one yacht rammed into the other and sunk it...Clarke paid damages.