|
Agreement In English Law
In English contract law, an agreement establishes the first stage in the existence of a contract. The three main elements of contractual formation are whether there is (1) offer and acceptance (agreement) (2) consideration (3) an intention to be legally bound. One of the most famous cases on forming a contract is ''Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company'', decided in nineteenth-century England. A medical firm advertised that its new wonder drug, a smoke ball, would cure people's flu, and if it did not, buyers would receive £100. When sued, Carbolic argued the ad was not to be taken as a serious, legally binding offer. It was merely an invitation to treat, and a gimmick. But the court of appeal held that it would appear to a reasonable man that Carbolic had made a serious offer. People had given good "consideration" for it by going to the "distinct inconvenience" of using a faulty product. "Read the advertisement how you will, and twist it about as you will," said Lindley LJ, "here ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Carbolic Smoke Ball Co
Carbolic may refer to: * Phenol, also known as ''carbolic acid'' * Carbolic soap, a type of soap containing carbolic acid See also * ''Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company'' {{Disambiguation ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Partridge V Crittenden
''Partridge v Crittenden'' 9681 WLR 1204 is an English case, which was heard by the Divisional Court of the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court of England and Wales on appeal from Chester magistrates' court, and is well known (amongst other cases) for establishing the legal precedent in English contract law that advertisements are usually considered to be invitations to treat. Facts This case was a case stated by the magistrates' court sitting at the Castle in Chester on 19 July 1967. On 13 April 1967 an advertisement by the appellant (Arthur Robert Partridge) appeared in the periodical "Cage and Aviary Birds", under the general heading "Classified Advertisements" which contained, amongst others, the words "Quality British A.B.C.R. ... Bramblefinch cocks, Bramblefinch hens 25 s. each". In no place was there any direct use of the words "offer for sale". A Thomas Shaw Thompson wrote to Partridge asking him to send him an ABCR ("aviary bred, close ringed") bramblefin ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Dickinson V Dodds
''Dickinson v Dodds'' (1876) 2 Ch D 463 is an English contract law case heard by the Court of Appeal, Chancery Division, which held that notification by a third party of an offer's withdrawal is effective just like a withdrawal by the person who made an offer. The significance of this case to many students of contract law is that a promise to keep an offer open (an option) is itself a contract which must have some consideration. Facts On Wednesday 10 June 1874, Mr Dodds delivered Mr Dickinson an offer to sell some houses for £800, an offer open until 9am on Friday 12 June. On Thursday afternoon, another man called Mr Berry told Mr Dickinson that the houses had already been sold to someone called Mr Allan (who was the second defendant). Mr Dickinson found Mr Dodds in the railway carriage at 7am on Friday, leaving Darlington railway station, and gave his acceptance there. But Mr Dodds said it was too late. Mr Dickinson sued for breach of contract. Judgment James LJ held that Mr ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Byrne V Van Tienhoven
''Byrne & Co v Leon Van Tien Hoven & Co'' 8805 CPD 344 is a leading English contract law case on the issue of revocation in relation to the postal rule. In it Lindley J of the High Court's Common Pleas Division ruled that an offer is only revoked by direct communication with the offeree, and that the postal rule does not apply in revocation; while simply posting a letter counts as a valid acceptance, it does not count as valid revocation. Facts Van Tienhoven & Co posted a letter from their office in Cardiff to Byrne & Co in New York City, offering 1000 boxes of tinplates for sale on 1 October. Byrne and Co got the letter on 11 October. They telegraphed acceptance on the same day. But on 8 October Van Tienhoven had sent another letter withdrawing their offer, because tinplate prices had just risen 25%. They refused to go through with the sale. Consequences Lindley J held that the withdrawal of the offer was not effective until it was communicated. His judgment stated the fol ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Option Agreement
An option contract, or simply option, is defined as "a promise which meets the requirements for the formation of a contract and limits the promisor's power to revoke an offer". Option contracts are common in professional sports. An option contract is a type of contract that protects an offeree from an offeror's ability to revoke their offer to engage in a contract. Under the common law, consideration for the option contract is required as it is still a form of contract, cf. Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 87(1). Typically, an offeree can provide consideration for the option contract by paying money for the contract or by providing value in some other form such as by rendering other performance or forbearance. Courts will generally try to find consideration if there are any grounds for doing so. See consideration for more information. The Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) has eliminated a need for consideration for firm offers between merchants in some limited circumstances. Intr ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Sale Of Goods Act 1979
The Sale of Goods Act 1979c 54 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom which regulated English contract law and UK commercial law in respect of goods that are sold and bought. The Act consolidated the original Sale of Goods Act 1893 and subsequent legislation, which in turn had codified and consolidated the law. Since 1979, there have been numerous minor statutory amendments and additions to the 1979 Act. It was replaced for some aspects of consumer contracts from 1 October 2015 by the Consumer Rights Act 2015c 15 but remains the primary legislation underpinning business-to-business transactions involving selling or buying goods. The Act applies to contracts where property in 'goods' is transferred or agreed to be transferred for a monetary consideration, in other words: where property (ownership) in personal chattels is sold. Part I Part I (section 1) states that the Act applies to contracts of sale of goods made on or after 1 January 1894. This was the date when t ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Barry V Davies (t/a Heathcote Ball & Co)
''Barry v Davies'' 000EWCA Civ 235 [20001 WLR 1962 is an English contract law case which established and confirmed that auction goods being sold without a reserve must be sold to a genuine highest bidder. The principle is subject to exceptions based on illegality, such as illicit goods, a seller without the right to sell the goods, or a buyer without the money or right to buy the goods. Facts The auctioneer withdrew goods from an auction (the goods had no reserve price) when a ''bona fide'' (good faith, that is in this case genuine) bid of £200 was effective. The court held that an auctioneer is bound to sell to the highest bidder where there is no reserve price, and cannot withdraw the sale simply because the price is too low. A bid in an auction, the possibility of acceptance of the bid, unless the bid is withdrawn, and the benefit to the auctioneer of driving up the price bid is sufficient consideration. The contract in an auction is between the buyer and the seller, not the ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Payne V Cave
''Payne v Cave'' (1789) 3 TR 148 is an old English contract law case, which stands for the proposition that an auctioneer's request for bids is not an offer but an invitation to treat. The bidders make the offers which can be accepted by the auctioneer. Facts Mr Cave had made the highest bid for a good in an auction. But then, Mr Cave changed his mind and he withdrew his bid before the auctioneer brought down his hammer. It was held that Mr. Cave, the defendant, was not bound to purchase the goods. His bid amounted to an offer which he was entitled to withdraw at any time before the auctioneer signified acceptance by knocking down the hammer. Note: The common law rule laid down in this case has now been codified in many countries in variations of the Sale of Goods Act, e.g. UK 1979 s57(2). Judgment The court held that Mr Cave was entitled to withdraw his offer at any time before the auctioneer accepted it. The auctioneer's request for bids was an invitation to treat, and each bid ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Harris V Nickerson
''Harris v Nickerson'' (1873) LR 8 QB 286 is an English law case concerning the requirements of offer and acceptance in the formation of a contract. The case established that an advertisement that goods will be put up for auction does not constitute an offer to any person that the goods will actually be put up, and that the advertiser is therefore free to withdraw the goods from the auction at any time prior to the auction. All three judges concurred but issued separate judgments. Facts The Defendant placed an advertisement in London papers that certain items, including brewing equipment and office furniture, would be placed up for auction over three days in Bury St. Edmunds. The Plaintiff obtained a commission to buy the office furniture and expended time and expense to travel to Bury St. Edmunds to bid for the office furniture. On the third day, the lots for the office furniture were withdrawn. The Plaintiff sued for loss of time and expense. The judge at first instance found ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Warlow V Harrison
Warlow is a municipality in the Ludwigslust-Parchim district, in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Germany Germany,, officially the Federal Republic of Germany, is a country in Central Europe. It is the second most populous country in Europe after Russia, and the most populous member state of the European Union. Germany is situated betwe .... References Ludwigslust-Parchim {{LudwigslustParchim-geo-stub ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Carlill V Carbolic Smoke Ball Co
''Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company'' 892EWCA Civ 1is an English contract law decision by the English Court of Appeal">Court of Appeal, which held an advertisement containing certain terms to get a reward constituted a binding unilateral offer that could be accepted by anyone who performed its terms. It is notable for its treatment of contract and of puffery in advertising, for its curious subject matter associated with medical quackery, and how the influential judges (particularly Lindley and Bowen) developed the law in inventive ways. ''Carlill'' is frequently discussed as an introductory contract case, and may often be the first legal case a law student studies in the law of contract. The case concerned a influenza, flu remedy called the "carbolic smoke ball". The manufacturer advertised that buyers who found it did not work would be awarded £100, a considerable amount of money at the time. The company was found to have been bound by its advertisement, which was const ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Harvey V Facey
''Harvey v Facey'' 893 is a contract law case decided by the United Kingdom Judicial Committee of the Privy Council on appeal from the Supreme Court of Judicature of Jamaica. In 1893 the Privy Council held final legal jurisdiction over most of the British Caribbean. Its importance in case law is that it defined the difference between ''an offer'' and supply of information. The Privy Council held that indication of lowest acceptable price does not constitute an offer to sell. Rather, it is considered a response to a request for information, specifically a "precise answer to a precise question" about the lowest acceptable price which the seller would consider. Application The case involved negotiations over a property in Jamaica. The defendant, Mr LM Facey, had been carrying on negotiations with the Mayor and Council of Kingston to sell a piece of property to Kingston City. On 7 October 1893, Facey was traveling on a train between Kingston and Porus and the appellant, Harvey, who ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
