In this essay I will discuss mainly two things; formation of a contract between two parties, the offer and the acceptance. I will report on their relevance for each of the 3 parties involved, finally I will give legal advice to Chuck (offeror), Arnold and Sylvester (offerees).
First we must distinguish whether Chuck’s advert was an invitation to treat or an offer. An example of a case involving an advertisement as an offer was Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball co. [1] This case involved an advert where Miss Carlill followed a set of conditions but still received influenza, she sued after being refused payment. The wording of the advertisement made the advert an offer; the reasonable persons test confirmed it is an offer.
However most adverts are perceived as invitations to treat and are designed to promote a service or product, this means offerees will be give offers to the offeror and then form a contractual agreement. As Lord Herschell said ‘The transmission of such a price-list does not amount to an offer to supply an unlimited quantity of the [product] prescribed at the price named’[2] which means as soon as an order is received the offeror is not automatically in a binding contract with the offeree. This point is shown in the case Fisher v Bell[3], the seller had advertised knives (which was illegal at the time) and was subsequently sued, the court argued that the seller simply had an invitation to treat and not an offer due to the wording. I believe that Chuck’s advert is considered an invitation to treat rather than an offer.
When a contract is made between two parties, 3 things can occur, acceptance, counter offer or enquiries for information. An ’ Acceptance must be absolute and unqualified’4, meaning both parties involved must communicate clearly to each other their willingness to complete the offer and to follow the terms set in the contract.
The next thing that can happen is a counter offer, when a counter offer is made a contract
Bibliography: 3) Yates Building v Pulleyn (1975) 237 EG 183 Court of Appeal 4) Holwell Securities v Hughes [1974] 1 WLR 155