''Williams v Carwardine'' EWHC_KB_J44
is_an_English_contract_law.html" ;"title="833
EWHC KB J44
is an English contract law">833
EWHC KB J44
is an English contract law case which concerns how a contract comes about through the offer of a reward. It also raises interesting questions about the necessity of reliance on an offer in the formation of a contract.

Facts

Mrs Mary Anne Williams claimed a reward of £20 from Mr Carwardine for giving information that led to the arrest of her husband, Mr William Williams, for murdering Mr Carwardine's brother. Walter Carwardine was murdered near a

pub A pub (short for public house) is a kind of drinking establishment which is licensed to serve alcoholic drinks for consumption on the premises. The term ''public house'' first appeared in the United Kingdom in late 17th century, and was ...

Hereford Hereford () is a cathedral city, civil parish and the county town of Herefordshire, England. It lies on the River Wye, approximately east of the border with Wales, south-west of Worcester and north-west of Gloucester. With a population ...

in March 1831, and his body was found in the

River Wye The River Wye (; cy, Afon Gwy ) is the Longest rivers of the United Kingdom, fourth-longest river in the UK, stretching some from its source on Plynlimon in mid Wales to the Severn estuary. For much of its length the river forms part of Wal ...

in April. The plaintiff, Mrs Williams, gave evidence at the Hereford

assizes The courts of assize, or assizes (), were periodic courts held around England and Wales until 1972, when together with the quarter sessions they were abolished by the Courts Act 1971 and replaced by a single permanent Crown Court. The assizes e ...

against two suspects, but did not say all she knew between 13 and 19 April. The suspects were acquitted. On 25 April 1831 the victim's brother and defendant, Mr Carwardine, published a handbill, stating there would be a £20 for...

"whoever would give such information as would lead to the discovery of the murder of Walter Carwardine."

Shortly after, Mrs Williams was "beaten and bruised" by Mr Williams. Thinking she would die soon in August, 1831, and apparently to "ease her conscience", Mrs Williams gave more information which led to the conviction of her husband, Mr William Williams, and another man. She claimed the reward. Mr Carwardine refused to pay, arguing that she was not induced by the reward to give the information. At the trial her motives were examined. It was found that she knew about the reward, but that she did not give information specifically to get the reward. Mrs Williams statement was as follows.

Judgment

Nisi prius

At the trial (

nisi prius ''Nisi prius'' () (Latin: "unless before") is a historical term in English law. In the 19th century, it came to be used to denote generally all legal actions tried before judges of the King's Bench Division and in the early twentieth century for ac ...

) Justice James Parke (Parke J) said,

"The motive was the state of her own feelings. My opinion is, the motive is not material."

He held that she was entitled to the reward.

Court of King's Bench

The Court, consisting of Lord Denman CJ, Littledale J and Patteson J held, that the plaintiff was entitled to recover the £20. The advertisement amounted to a general promise or contract to pay the offered reward to any person who performed the condition mentioned in it, namely, who gave the information. Two judges clearly stated that motives were irrelevant. One of two case reports read as follows.

Significance

This case has generated some controversy, because in '' R v Clarke'' the Australian High Court held that it was consistent with the proposition that "reliance" on an offer is essential for the possibility of acceptance, and therefore formation of a contract.. By contrast, Littledale J suggests that if someone "knows" of an offer, this is sufficient, whatever their motive.See further P Mitchell and J Phillips, 'The Contractual Nexus: Is Reliance Essential?' (2002) 22(1)

Oxford Journal of Legal Studies The ''Oxford Journal of Legal Studies'' is a legal journal published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Faculty of Law, University of Oxford. According to the ''Journal Citation Reports'', the journal has a 2018 impact factor of 1.083, ...

115, who suggest that reliance is not essential, and that '' R v Clarke'' does not represent

English contract law English contract law is the body of law that regulates legally binding agreements in England and Wales. With its roots in the lex mercatoria and the activism of the judiciary during the industrial revolution, it shares a heritage with countries ...

. A third possibility is that no knowledge of an offer is necessary for the formation of a binding obligation (whether contractual or not). If someone offers a reward, or makes a general offer to anyone who performs certain terms, they will be bound by their offer to the person who confers a benefit upon them. Not to do so could be regarded either as unconscionable, or lead to unjust enrichment.

Notes

{{reflist, 2

References

*Paul Mitchell and John Phillips, 'The Contractual Nexus: Is Reliance Essential?' (2002) 22(1)

115-134

External links

*Full text of the judgment o
Bailii
English agreement case law 1833 in case law 1833 in British law Court of King's Bench (England) cases