Termination of an Offer (1)
Intro: The essay/problem/dilemma involves the law on Contract, in particular the Law of Invitations to Treat (ITT). When forming a contract, 4 essential elements are needed. They are: Offer, Accpetance, Considerations and Intention. It's necessary to draw a distinction between and offer, which is a definite promise to be legally bound - and an ITT, which is merely an openinig of negotiations - not capable of being accepted. This essay focuses on how an offer can be terminated. The judges have found various ways that an offer can be terminated. They are: Death, lapse of time, counter-offer, failure of a condition and revocation.
1. Death: Death of the Offeror: It was said obiter in "Dickinson v Dodds", that where the offeror dies the offer dies with him. However in the case of "Bradbury v Morgan", the court said obiter that if the offeror wasn't needed in person, then the offer need not be terminated.
AO2: However, this causes problems when terminating an offer as it leaves the law unclear, uncertain and unpredictable, as both are only obiter. It appears that if the offeree knows that the offeror has died then the offer will lapse. The law is unclear as neither of the above statements are law binding. Therefore, it is probably better that "Dickenson v Dodds" is followed as this would avoid the possibility of Fraud.
Offeree: In "Reynolds v Atkinson", it was said obiter that if the offeree dies then the offer dies with him also. AO2: This can be seen as a logical decision, because despite it being an obiter statement it's generally accepted as a true statement of the law as the offeree's no longer there to accept the offer.