contract law

• Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball

  • refers to offers/contracts (this was binding)
  • it represented a unilateral contract
  • the ad was not an offer. the promise was considered binding once the performance (using the smoke ball) was done, so it was a unilateral contract.
• Leonard v PepsiCo

  • refers to mere puffs / puffery
  • use the REASONABLE PERSON TEST
• Boots pharmacy

  • refers to invitation to treat
  • inv to treat -> customer's offer -> cashier's acceptance/offer complete/contract formed -> transaction complete
  • eg. displaying an item on a shelf is an invitation to treat, not an offer. The offer is made when the customer presents the items at the register. The acceptance of the offer is not when the cashier accepts the money, it is when the customer takes the product to cashier.
• Byrne v Van Tienhoven

  • refers to revocation
  • issue: Van's revocation letter reached Byrne too late (uneffective communication) and Byrne already accepted Van's offer
• Goldsbrough Mort v Quinn

  • refers to option contracts (option to accept offer at later date)
  • refer to "consideration" and "legally binding"
  • Quinn promised to sell house to Mort. Mort gave 5 shillings in consideration to think for a week. Quinn sold to someone else which is wrong as the option contract can't be revoked
• Hyde v Wrench

  • refer to counter offers
  • refer to original offer being "killed" when the counter offer is made
  • Wrench offered Hyde $1200. H refused, W offered $1000. H refused, H wanted $950, W refused. H wanted $1000, W closed offer. W won after H sued.
• Stevenson Jaques v McLean

  • refer to request for information
  • McLean offered Jaques to sell iron and promised the offer to be open until Monday. J asked M a question regarding delivery (req. for info.). M sold the iron to someone else (thought it was a counter offer)