''Harris v Nickerson'' (1873) LR 8 QB 286 is an English law case concerning the requirements of

offer and acceptance Offer and acceptance are generally recognised as essential requirements for the formation of a contract, and analysis of their operation is a traditional approach in contract law. The offer and acceptance formula, developed in the 19th century, id ...

in the formation of a

contract A contract is a legally enforceable agreement between two or more parties that creates, defines, and governs mutual rights and obligations between them. A contract typically involves the transfer of goods, services, money, or a promise to tran ...

. The case established that an advertisement that goods will be put up for

auction An auction is usually a process of buying and selling goods or services by offering them up for bids, taking bids, and then selling the item to the highest bidder or buying the item from the lowest bidder. Some exceptions to this definition ex ...

does not constitute an

offer Offer or offers may refer to: People * Ofer Eshed or Offer Eshed (1942-2007), Israeli basketball player * Offer Nissim (born 1964), Israeli house DJ * Avner Offer, economic historian * Dick Offer, English rower * Jack Offer, English rower * Steve ...

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 London is the capital and largest city of England and the United Kingdom, with a population of just under 9 million. It stands on the River Thames in south-east England at the head of a estuary down to the North Sea, and has been a majo ...

papers that certain items, including brewing equipment and office furniture, would be placed up for auction over three days in

Bury St. Edmunds Bury St Edmunds (), commonly referred to locally as Bury, is a historic market, cathedral town and civil parish in Suffolk, England.OS Explorer map 211: Bury St.Edmunds and Stowmarket Scale: 1:25 000. Publisher:Ordnance Survey – Southampton A ...

. 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 On the third day, the lots for the office furniture were withdrawn.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 in favour of the Plaintiff. Leave was given to appeal to the High Court. The Plaintiff submitted that the advertisement constituted a contract between themselves and the Defendant that the latter would sell the furniture according to the conditions stated in the advertisement, and that accordingly the withdrawal of the furniture was a breach of contract. The Defendant submitted the advertisement of a sale did not constitute a contract that any particular lot or class of lots would actually be put up for sale.

Judgment

The court held unanimously that the advertisement did not constitute an offer, but rather was a mere declaration of intent. Blackburn, J. founded his judgment on public policy grounds, calling it a "startling proposition" that "any one who advertises a sale by publishing an advertisement is now responsible to everybody who attends the sale for his cab hire or travelling expenses". Quain and Archibald, JJ. also drew public policy arguments, emphasising that there existed no authority on which to base a decision that the Defendant is liable to indemnify all those who attended his auction. The court upheld the appeal.

References

{{reflist English agreement case law 1873 in case law Lord Blackburn cases 1873 in British law High Court of Justice cases Auction case law

Facts

Judgment

See also

References