A level-Contract Law
0.0(0)
Studied by 3 people0.0(0)
View linked note
Call with Kai
Knowt PlayNew
Learn
Practice Test
Spaced Repetition
Match
FlashcardsCard Sorting
1/18
Earn XP
Description and Tags
Study Analytics
Name | Mastery | Learn | Test | Matching | Spaced |
|---|
No study sessions yet.
19 Terms
1
New cards
ITT
An invitation for negotiation/to make an offer.
2
New cards
Valid
all essentials are present (Binding in nature)
3
New cards
Voidable
At the option of the aggrieved party to be upheld
4
New cards
Void
Having zero legal value (not binding)
5
New cards
Unilateral Contract
One party performing (Carlill V Carbolic)
6
New cards
Collateral Contract
Subpart of a contract (Auction)
7
New cards
Offer
A firm proposal to enter into a contract
8
New cards
Offerer
A person making the offer
9
New cards
Offeree
A person receiving the offer
10
New cards
(Gibson V MCC)
Council Letter Case. Lord Denning ruled in favour of Mr Gibson on the element of reading the claimants mind. Essentially, departing from the objective (Literal Approach) which is necessary in contract law. However, the Court of Appeal overturned this position stating.
11
New cards
(Fisher V Bell)
Flick knife case ITT
12
New cards
(Pharmaceutical Society V Boots)
Goods on display are held to be an ITT for the reason that if you were to place them in your cart acceptance wouldn’t take place. However, it is quite complex in the case of e-commerce and laws are still developing.
13
New cards
(Partridge V Crittenden)
Endangered bird advertisement (Bilateral) ITT
14
New cards
(Carlil V Carbolic)
100 Pounds Reward (Unilateral) Offer
15
New cards
(Williams v Carwardine)
On reporting details for rewards (Unilateral) Offer
16
New cards
2 Cases with an Auction reserve price
(Payne V Cave)-Where Cave gave a bid & withdrew it last second before the gavel was struck.
(British Car Auction v Wright)- Where an unfit car was sold, naturally resulting in an offence under the Road Traffic Act 1972 to offer to sell such a vehicle. However, with the nature of a reserve price auction, it was held to be an ITT, therefore no liability. Similar to the Fisher V Bell case.
(British Car Auction v Wright)- Where an unfit car was sold, naturally resulting in an offence under the Road Traffic Act 1972 to offer to sell such a vehicle. However, with the nature of a reserve price auction, it was held to be an ITT, therefore no liability. Similar to the Fisher V Bell case.
17
New cards
2 Cases Without an Auction reserve price/offer
(Barry V Davies)- Where a reserve price was forgotten, the lowest offer was binding for engines appraised much higher than what was bid. (Warlaw V Harrison)-Where a reserve price was forgotten, the lowest offer was binding for a Horse.
18
New cards
A case on Information in the auction catalogue/ITT
Harris v Nickerson)- Advertisement of the auction fell under an ITT. Therefore the claimant’s time wasted/resources as a result of travelling over to a cancelled auction were void.
19
New cards
What did the House of Lords( Current Supreme Court) State in Gibson V MCC?
The House of Lords Stated(Today’s Supreme Court)
Firstly, an offer is different from ITT. Secondly, the objective approach should be used -don’t try to read the mind of the claimant such as Lord Denning had done so subjectively. And finally, the Importance of offer and acceptance should be upheld.
Firstly, an offer is different from ITT. Secondly, the objective approach should be used -don’t try to read the mind of the claimant such as Lord Denning had done so subjectively. And finally, the Importance of offer and acceptance should be upheld.