Contract Law Cases

?
  • Created by: deepa
  • Created on: 18-01-15 14:42
Gibson
invitation to treat ("may" be prepared to sell)
1 of 19
Storer
all important terms settled = offer
2 of 19
Clarke
was unaware of reward = not entitled to it
3 of 19
Gibbons v Procter
was unaware of reward but later became aware = entitled to it
4 of 19
Tinn v Hoffman
cross offers ≠ contract
5 of 19
Adams v Linsell
Postal Rule: offer is accepted once letter is in the post box
6 of 19
Brogden v Metropolitan Railway
performance (continuation to supply coal) = acceptance
7 of 19
Hyde v Wrench
adding/modifying terms during acceptance = cross offer
8 of 19
Stevenson v McLean
request for further information = neither acceptance nor rejection
9 of 19
Butler v Ex-Cell-O
in a "battle of forms" - last shot wins
10 of 19
Routledge v Grant
no requirement to keep offer open during time stated
11 of 19
Byrne v Van Tienhoven
revocation must be communicated before acceptance is sent in post
12 of 19
Dickinson v Dodd
communication of revocation through a reliable source is sufficient
13 of 19
Central London Property v High Trees
contract was binding despite modification (Promissory Estoppel)
14 of 19
Balfour
domestic agreements are unlikely to be legally binding
15 of 19
Edwards
commercial agreements are likely to be enforceable in court
16 of 19
Hillas v Arcos
contract is not dependent on future arrangements
17 of 19
Scammell v Ousten
terms too vague = no contract
18 of 19
Beswick
3rd party is unable to enforce a contract
19 of 19

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

all important terms settled = offer

Back

Storer

Card 3

Front

was unaware of reward = not entitled to it

Back

Preview of the back of card 3

Card 4

Front

was unaware of reward but later became aware = entitled to it

Back

Preview of the back of card 4

Card 5

Front

cross offers ≠ contract

Back

Preview of the back of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Contract Law resources »