Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
13 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
invitation to treat |
Fisher and Bell 1960
Shop display including a flick knife was not an offer to sell but an invitation to treat. |
|
|
Shop displays in self service shops are an invitation to treat |
Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists (southern ) Ltd [1952] 2 QB 795
Issue: did Boots contravene the Pharmacy And Poisons Act 1933 by offering drugs for sale on self-service shelves? Judgement: Shop displays in self service shops are an invitation to treat. |
|
|
Offer made to the public at large is still a contract. |
Hunter v General Accident, fire and life assurance corp 1909 SC (HL) 30 Offer issue: contract made to the public at large. Letts diary containing a coupon giving an insurance claim ( on registration) to anyone killed on the railway within 12 months of registration. Judgement. Open offer made and accepted by registration. It did not need further acceptance by the company. |
|
|
Offers lapse after a reasonable time |
Wylie and Lochhead v McElroy and Sons (1873) 1 R 41
Issue: lapse of offer in reasonable time. Offered Iron works for Mcelroy & Sons. Offer wasn't accepted until 5 weeks later when the price of iron had increased. Judgement: acceptance exceeded a reasonable time so no contract existed. |
|
|
Acceptance of a counteroffer or qualified acceptance ends an offer. |
Wolf and Wolf v Forfar Potato Company 1984 SLT 100 Acceptance Issue: Potatoes offered to international potato merchant who accepted offer but included new conditions not in original offer. Forfar potatoes did not supply potatoes and were sued for breach of contract. Judgement: no contract as no consensus in idem. |
|
|
Offer or quotation or tender?. |
Philip v Knoblauch (1907)
Plate Linseed case; detailed quote made in the course of commerce was an offer |
|
|
Postal rule - lost in the post |
Mason v Behar (1882) Acceptance Postal rule - lost in the post.Not a firm decision but indicates that Scots courts would treat acceptance lost in the post as not concluding the contract. |
|
|
Postal role - incorrectly addressed letter still concluded contract.
|
Jacobson, Sons & Co. v Underwood & Son Ltd (1984) Acceptance. Postal role - incorrectly addressed letter still concluded contract. |
|
|
Poor communication of services so no consensus so no offer. |
Mathieson Gee (Ayrshire) Ltd v Quigley (1952) Lack of consensus Mathieson offered hire of equipment to clear a pond whereas Quigley thought the offer was to clear the pond. |
|
|
Offer made 'subject to contract' is not a contract. |
Stobo Ltd v Morrisons (Gowns) Ltd (1949) Lack of agreement. Made an agreement that the defender would purchase a shop and then sell it to the pursuer. The agreement was made subject to contract indication it was a pre-contract. Defender purchased the shop and then refused to sell it on. Held that a pre-contract agreement is not a contract. |
|
|
Did they intend to be bound? |
Robertson v Anderson (2003) Intention to be legally bound. Friends agreed to share Bingo winnings until one of them won. Claimed no intention to be legally bound but court upheld claim. |
|
|
Capacity to contract while intoxicated |
Pollock v Burns (1875) Lack of capacity - intoxication. Contract will be void but intoxicated person must challenge the contract on sobering up
|
|
|
Level of intoxication must be high to void a contract. |
Taylor v Provan (1864) Lack of capacity - intoxication. Lack of capacity must be high to result in a loss of capacity. |
