EASY
WHAT IS THE CASE OF FISHER AND BELL ABOUT
KNIVES IN THE SHOP WINDOW
IN WHICH CASE DID A OFFER TO SELL B HIS FARM FOR 1,000 BUT B RESPONDED THAT HE WOULD BUY FOR 950 WHEN HE DID NOT HEAR FROM A, HE AGREED TO BUY FOR 1,000 BUT HELD HE HAD REJECTED THE OFFER SO HE COULD NOT LATER ACCEPT IT
HYDE V WRENCH
Outline the facts of Gibson v Manchester County Council
In September 1970 the Manchester County Council adopted a policy of selling council houses to its tenants. The respondent who was renting a council house applied on a printed form supplied by the council for details of the price of the house and mortgage terms available from the council. On 10 February 1971 the city treasurer wrote to the respondent that the council 'may be prepared to sell the house to you at the purchase price of £2,725 less 20% =£2,180 (freehold)'. The letter then gave details of the mortgage likely to be made available to the respondent and went on: 'If you would like to make formal application to buy your Council house please complete the enclosed application form and return it to me as soon as possible.' The application form was headed 'Application to buy a council house' and concluded with a statement: 'I … now wish to purchase my Council house. The above answers [ie the answers in the application form] are correct and I agree that they shall be the basis of the arrangements regarding the purchase … ' The respondent completed the application form except for the purchase price and returned it to the council on 5 March. On 18 March the respondent wrote to the council: 'I would be obliged if you will carry on with the purchase as per my application already in your possession.' Before contracts were prepared and exchanged there was a change in control of the council following the local government elections in May 1971 and on 7 July the council resolved to discontinue the scheme for the sale of council houses forthwith and to proceed only with those sales where there had been an exchange of contracts. On 27 July the council wrote to the respondent to advise him that the council was unable to proceed further with his application to purchase. The respondent brought an action alleging that there was a binding contract for the sale of the house constituted by an offer contained in the city treasurer's letter of 10 February 1971 and his acceptance of it by the return of the application form on 5 March and his letter of 18 March, and claiming specific performance of the contract.
Held – The parties had not concluded a binding contract because the council had never made an offer capable of acceptance, since the statements in the city treasurer's letter of 10 February that the council 'may be prepared to sell' and inviting the respondent 'to make formal application to buy' were not an offer to sell but merely an invitation to treat. The respondent was therefore not entitled to specific performance.
WHAT IS THE LOCUS CLASSICUS FOR ADVERTISEMENT
CARLILL V CARBOLIC SMOKEBALL
In which case did a boy buy 11 waistcoasts that were held not to be necessaries
Nash v Inman
In the case of
Byrne v Van Tienhoven (1880) 5 C.P.D. 344
The offeror offered to sell goods to the offeree in NY by letter on October 1. The offeree received the offer on October 11 and immediately sent a telegram accepting it. On October 8 the offeror sent a letter revoking his offer and this was received by the offeree on October 25. What was held in that case?
The revocation was not effective until it reached the offeree and
HARVEY V FACEY IS THE CASE REGARDING WHAT AREA?
A.. PRICE ESTIMATES
B..COMMUNICATION OF AN OFFER
C.. REVOCATION OF AN OFFER
A.. PRICE ESTIMATES
What is the name of the case where the mother bought her daughter an apartment whilse she studied law?
Jones v Padavatton
In
Tinn v Hoffmann & Co. 29 LT 271
Two persons, each in ignorance at the time of what the other had done, wrote a letter to each other on the same day, the one offering to buy a certain article at a certain price, and the other offering to sell the same article at the same price. The letters crossed each other in the post. Was there a contract?
No contract had been concluded between the parties. The promise or offer being made on each side in ignorance of the promise or offer made on the other side, neither of them can be construed as an acceptance of the other."
WHICH CASE IS THE AUCTION CASE?
PAYNE V CAVE
In stilk v Myrick the captain promised the rest of the crew extra wages if they would sail the ship back home after two sailors had deserted. What was held in this case?
It was held that the crew were already bound by their contract to meet the normal emergencies of the voyage and were doing no more than their original contractual duty in sailing the ship home. Thus they were not entitled to theextra wages
In which case did - A woman, her granddaughter and a paying boarder all took part in a weekly competition organized by a Sunday newspaper. The agreements over postage were informal and the entries were made in the grandmother’s name. One week they won 750 pounds. The paying boarder was derived a third share by the two.The court held: There was a legally binding agreement that any prize should be shared between all three.
a. Tanner v Tanner
b. Simpkins v Pays
c. Merrit v Merrit
c. Merrit v Merrit
WHAT HAPPENED IN BALFOUR V BALFOUR
Mr. Balfour had agreed to give his wife a certain sum of money per month as maintenance while he was living in Sri Lanka. Once he left they separated and Mr. Balfour stopped payments. Mrs. Balfour brought an action against him to enforce payments
The court held: There was no enforceable agreement as there was not enough evidence to suggest that they were intended to be legally bounded by the promise.
In which case did
The parents of the contracting parties to a marriage mutually agreed in writing after the marriage, as a mode of giving effect to verbal promises made before the marriage, that the father of the wife would pay £200 to his son-in-law, and the father of the husband would pay £100 to his son. The father of the wife failed to pay the £200 and the husband brought an action against him.
Held: Notwithstanding the relationship of the parties, the husband was unable to sue on the agreement since he was a stranger to the consideration for the contract which must move from the party entitled to sue upon the contract
Tweddle v Atkinson
In the case of
De La Bere v Pearson Ltd [1908] 1 KB 280
The defendants were the proprietors of a newspaper in which was published a statement that readers desiring financial advice should address their queries to the city editor. If the defendants so desired, the readers' questions and the answers thereto were to be published in the newspaper. On 6 March 1905, the plaintiff, a reader of the newspaper, wrote to the city editor saying: "Kindly advise me how I can b
De La Bere v Pearson Ltd [1908] 1 KB 280
The defendants were the proprietors of a newspaper in which was published a statement that readers desiring financial advice should address their queries to the city editor. If the defendants so desired, the readers' questions and the answers thereto were to be published in the newspaper. On 6 March 1905, the plaintiff, a reader of the newspaper, wrote to the city editor saying: "Kindly advise me how I can best invest 800 pounds in two or three fairly safe securities…Please also name good stockbroker." The city editor handed this letter to an "outside broker," who wrote to the plaintiff and advised certain investments. The plaintiff sent sums of money to the broker and the broker misappropriated them. broker was an undischarged bankrupt. The city editor did not know this, but it was found as a fact that he could have discovered it by making inquiries. The plaintiff sued for breach of contract to use due care to give financial advice.
What was held?
est invest 800 pounds in two or three fairly safe securities…Please also name good stockbroker." The city editor handed this letter to an "outside broker," who wrote to the plaintiff and advised certain investments. The plaintiff sent sums of money to the broker and the broker misappropriated them. broker was an undischarged bankrupt. The city editor did not know this, but it was found as a fact that he could have discovered it by making inquiries. The plaintiff sued for breach of contract to use due care to give financial advice.
Held: The publication of the questions and answers in the newspaper might tend to increase its sale, and, therefore, when the plaintiff accepted the offer by the newspaper there came into being a contract for a good consideration.