offer and acceptance

• The law of contract defines the circumstances when promises are enforceable.
• Not all promises are enforced by courts.
• For promises to be enforceable as a valid contract, certain elements must be present.
• The elements of a valid contract are: Offer, Acceptance, Consideration, and Intention to create a legal relationship.
• The Eurymedon (1975), Lord Wilberforce stated that there must be an Offer, Acceptance, Consideration, and Intention to create a legal relationship for a contract to be valid.
• Smith v Hughes (1871) stated that if a person conducts themselves in a way that a reasonable man would believe that they are assenting to the terms proposed by the other party, and the other party enters into the contract with them, the person conducting themselves would be equally bound as if they had intended to agree to the other party’s terms.
• Lord Clarke stated in Flexible Systems Ltd v Molkerei Aloi Muller Gmbh 7 Co (2010) that if the formation of a contract was decided Subjectively, it would lead to much uncertainty based on what the parties thought, the “real intention”.
• Centrovincial Estates v Merchant Investment Assurance Co (1983) stated that the Defendants were bound by the agreement even though they did not reach the agreement before 25/12 on the then market rate for rental.
• In June 1982, the Claimant mistakenly wrote to the Defendant inviting the Defendant to agree that the current market rate was £65,000.
• In an Offer, there is no need to communicate the acceptance.
• In an Offer, the Offeror can withdraw or revoke the Offer at any time before acceptance and it must be communicated to the Offeree.
• In an Offer, the Offer can be revoked even before the time ends, provided the offer is not accepted and the revocation is communicated.
• Unless there was a collateral contract with consideration provided to keep the offer open till the time stipulated, the offer will come to an end after the lapse of a reasonable time.
• In an Offer, the offer will come to an end when the event or condition happens.
• Valid Acceptance in an Offer is when the specified conduct or act is performed by the Offeree.
• Hudson suggests that in Reward cases, the Offeror should not be prejudiced by the conduct of the Offeree and further, the Offeror has benefitted from the Offeree's performance of the stipulated act.
• The postal rule does not apply for revocation of offers, the offeree must receive the revocation.
• In an Offer, the contract is concluded when the Offeree receives the revocation.
• In an Offer, the offer can be revoked if the Offeror dies.
• The Defendant accepted the Claimant's offer.
• A meeting of minds cannot happen unless there is knowledge of the offer.
• A counter offer is not acceptance and it means that a new offer is being made which has the effect of “killing off” the earlier offer.
• If a particular method of acceptance is stipulated by the offeror in the offer and he states that it is the only method of acceptance, then it must be complied with as that is the only method which will be accepted by the courts.
• A new offer is being made.
• If one performs the act of acceptance without the knowledge of the offer, they will not be able to sue on the contract.
• The original offer still stands.
• An offer cannot be accepted in ignorance of the offer.
• A mirror image of the offer is final and unqualified assent to all the terms of the offer.
• The original offer is rejected and is no longer valid.
• More inquiry, asking for more information, would neither be acceptance and neither will it be a counter offer.
• If there are any variations or if there are new terms added, this would amount to a counter offer.
• There are two aspects of acceptance: a mirror image of the offer and acceptance must be communicated.
• The Offeree is merely postponing his decision until he receives more information.
• Ignorance of the offer can lead to injustice and unfairness.
• A contract is a consensus ad idem – a meeting of minds.
• Dickinson v Dodds – offer can also be communicated through a Third Party.
• The offer was made by proclamation, not to the plaintiff directly, and he should have known that it can be revoked in the same manner.
• 1866 – Plaintiff discovered the criminal and told the authorities
• Shuey v US (1875) 20 April 1865 – Proclamation on the giving of reward to catch a criminal
• The plaintiff was ignorant of the withdrawal but this is an immaterial fact.