SAMPLE ANSWER FOR CONTRACT ESSAY
The issue arises in this case is whether the supermarket’s supervisor has right to force Bill to pay for the goods.
In order to determine whether Bill can be forced to pay the selected goods, we must consider whether there is any contract has been concluded the moment Bill takes the items from the shelves. In order to identify the existence of the contract, it is important to examine the rule of an invitation to treat and an offer. It is important to understand the difference between these two because the legal consequences will be different. Invitation to treat (ITT) is not an offer. It is made when one party invites the other party to make an offer. The term ‘offer’ is defined in s. 2 (a) of the Contracts Act 1950 as when one person signifies to another his willingness to do or to abstain from doing anything with a view to obtaining the assent of that other to the act or abstinence, he is said to make a proposal. The main distinction between the two is that, an offer can be converted into a contract by acceptance, provided the other requirements of a valid contract are present, whereas an ITT can not be accepted and further cannot be turned into a valid contract.
One of the examples/situations that the courts have decided to be an invitation to treat is the act of displaying of goods. Normally when it involves self-service supermarket, what happens is that the supermarket displays the goods to induce offer from the customers. They invite people to make an offer. It means that the display of goods is only an invitation to treat, it does not make an offer. The offer will be done by the customers when they put the items on the cashier’s desk to make the payment.
The contract is only made at the cashier’s desk when the customer pays for the items. This legal principle is clearly illustrated in the case of Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v. Boots Cash Chemist Ltd. In this case the defendant was charged for selling certain poisons without the
In order to determine whether Bill can be forced to pay the selected goods, we must consider whether there is any contract has been concluded the moment Bill takes the items from the shelves. In order to identify the existence of the contract, it is important to examine the rule of an invitation to treat and an offer. It is important to understand the difference between these two because the legal consequences will be different. Invitation to treat (ITT) is not an offer. It is made when one party invites the other party to make an offer. The term ‘offer’ is defined in s. 2 (a) of the Contracts Act 1950 as when one person signifies to another his willingness to do or to abstain from doing anything with a view to obtaining the assent of that other to the act or abstinence, he is said to make a proposal. The main distinction between the two is that, an offer can be converted into a contract by acceptance, provided the other requirements of a valid contract are present, whereas an ITT can not be accepted and further cannot be turned into a valid contract.
One of the examples/situations that the courts have decided to be an invitation to treat is the act of displaying of goods. Normally when it involves self-service supermarket, what happens is that the supermarket displays the goods to induce offer from the customers. They invite people to make an offer. It means that the display of goods is only an invitation to treat, it does not make an offer. The offer will be done by the customers when they put the items on the cashier’s desk to make the payment.
The contract is only made at the cashier’s desk when the customer pays for the items. This legal principle is clearly illustrated in the case of Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v. Boots Cash Chemist Ltd. In this case the defendant was charged for selling certain poisons without the