terms. According to a general rule, an advertisement of goods for sale is not regarded as an offer, Partridge V. Crittenden. Its intention does not intend to be bound by any acceptance without further negotiation; otherwise, Anna would be bound to provide everyone who received the club. Although it has an ‘offer’ in the content, the statement is still seemed as an invitation to treat, Spencer V. Harding. Moreover, the advertisement is not clear enough to be an offer as the price is at ‘£300 or nearest
Words: 1537 - Pages: 7
|Coursework Header Sheet |[pic] | |186606-24 | | |[pic] [pic] [pic] [pic] [pic] [pic] [pic] [pic] [pic] [pic] | | |Course |LAW1091: Business & Co Law
Words: 2059 - Pages: 9
Introduction Billy is attempting to claim the extra $20,000 and a share in the farm, which he believes he is entitled to. Choy, however, has calculated that the cost of Billy’s school and university fees amount to greater than the promised $20,000 and that the co-owner of the farm would not allow the transfer of a share in the farm. In order to advise Billy in whether he is entitled to the extra $20,000 and a share in the farm, the key facts and relevant issues must be examined to determine
Words: 2706 - Pages: 11
it's become offeree. A uniletaral offer it is a one sided promise to pay or reward someone for performing and act ,promise because it is made without it is one sided the offeror knowing who the offeree is for example,see the case of Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co (1893) 1 QB 256, CA. According to S4(1) of the contract act 1950 cominication of the offer its complete when the offeree knows about it there will be no offer unless it is clearly cominicated to the offeree and it must be to knowledge
Words: 518 - Pages: 3
‘Acceptance’ page (15 miss notes) hnd book 664 Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball co (1893) case summery. In this case the defendants were the manufactures of smokeballs which they claimed could prevent the flu. They published adverts stating anyone that used their smokeballs for a specific period of time and caught the flu would receive a payout of£100. Carbolic company proved they were serious about this offer so they put aside £1,000. A lady called Mrs Carlill purchased the smokeballs and still recieved
Words: 2257 - Pages: 10
Acknowledgement I would like to express my gratitude to all those who helped me to complete this report. I am deeply thanks to the support from Mr. Rashani Meegama whose helps me to get information and knowledge that needed to make this work successful. I am also grateful to all my fellow mates who supported in the success of this assignment in providing necessary details. I would also like to thank my mom, whose support was very important in achieving the glory and success of this assignment.
Words: 5143 - Pages: 21
creates a binding contract. The Key concepts in relation to offer and acceptance include the distinction between an offer and an invitation to treat, The case of Carlill v Carbolic Smoke ball co. is
Words: 1755 - Pages: 8
safety and s14(2) .e) durability.14(3) of the sales of goods act states that goods must be fit for purpose in relevance. Section 14(2) deals with instances where goods are usable but have some form of defect. Examples include Ltd Rogers and Another v Parish (Scarborough) and Another 1987 where the Court of Appeal held that a series of defects in a Range Rover made it unmerchantable (not of satisfactory quality) even though it was fit to drive. The relation to the case at hand the Tefal active fry
Words: 2312 - Pages: 10
CONTRACT LAW Introduction: Contracts form a central feature of our modern life. Most activities we engage in constitute contracts. The law of contract is therefore key to defining and strengthening relationships. A contract is a mini legal system which has provisions and terms which govern the relationship between parties thereto and hence conferring rights and obligations upon them. The law of contracts is the most important and the basic part of law. All of us enter into contracts in our day-to-day
Words: 3210 - Pages: 13
Britain v Boots Cash Chemist (p305) Case regarding items on shelves in a store. The items are simply an invitation to “treat”, the offer is only made at the check-out. Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co (p309) Company advertised nobody would get sick. Mrs Carlill followed directions and got sick. There was a unilateral contract comprising the offer (by advertisement) of the Carbolic Smoke Ball company) and the acceptance (by performance of conditions stated in the offer) by Mrs Carlill Harvey v Facey
Words: 2310 - Pages: 10
