Comlaw 201
Harvey v Facey - ANSWERJust providing info is not an offer
-The seller (Facey) was just providing information when he said the lowest price is 900
pounds, it was not an offer. So there was no agreement when Harvey accepted the
'offer' (which was just providing info, not an offer).
O'Keefe v Lee Calan Imports - ANSWERJust advertising the product and price on its
own is not an offer.
-Price of the car should have been higher ($1795) but the ad mistakenly listed it at a
lower price ($1095) and Lee Calan Imports was not obliged to sell at the lower price as
it was not an offer.
Fisher v Bell - ANSWERGoods displayed on the shelf with a price tag are merely an
invitation to treat by the seller, not an offer.
Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company - ANSWERAn offer may be made through an
advertisement (i.e. to the world at large) if the offerors intention to be bound is clear.
Unilateral contract: Once Carlill did what was needed to be done she didn't have to do
anything else as the contract was already made.
Felthouse v Bindley - ANSWERAn offeror cannot impose silence as a means of
acceptance so to enforce a contract against someone
Dickinson v Dodds - ANSWERAn offer may be withdrawn before acceptance without
any formal notice to the offeree if the offeree has knowledge that the person who made
the offer has done something inconsistent with the continuance of the offer. BUT that
knowledge must be first hand via a reliable source (if not then the offeree will be entitled
to damages). Revocation can be communicated by a reliable third party.
Sommerville v Rice - ANSWERRevocation must be communicated for it to be effective
and should be communicated before the offer is accepted. Postal rule does not apply to
revocation.
-Landlord made an offer of lease
-Tenant posted letter of acceptance (postal rule applies)
-Then, before the letter of acceptance reached the landlord, the tenant posted a letter of
revocation (postal rule does not apply)
Harvey v Facey - ANSWERJust providing info is not an offer
-The seller (Facey) was just providing information when he said the lowest price is 900
pounds, it was not an offer. So there was no agreement when Harvey accepted the
'offer' (which was just providing info, not an offer).
O'Keefe v Lee Calan Imports - ANSWERJust advertising the product and price on its
own is not an offer.
-Price of the car should have been higher ($1795) but the ad mistakenly listed it at a
lower price ($1095) and Lee Calan Imports was not obliged to sell at the lower price as
it was not an offer.
Fisher v Bell - ANSWERGoods displayed on the shelf with a price tag are merely an
invitation to treat by the seller, not an offer.
Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company - ANSWERAn offer may be made through an
advertisement (i.e. to the world at large) if the offerors intention to be bound is clear.
Unilateral contract: Once Carlill did what was needed to be done she didn't have to do
anything else as the contract was already made.
Felthouse v Bindley - ANSWERAn offeror cannot impose silence as a means of
acceptance so to enforce a contract against someone
Dickinson v Dodds - ANSWERAn offer may be withdrawn before acceptance without
any formal notice to the offeree if the offeree has knowledge that the person who made
the offer has done something inconsistent with the continuance of the offer. BUT that
knowledge must be first hand via a reliable source (if not then the offeree will be entitled
to damages). Revocation can be communicated by a reliable third party.
Sommerville v Rice - ANSWERRevocation must be communicated for it to be effective
and should be communicated before the offer is accepted. Postal rule does not apply to
revocation.
-Landlord made an offer of lease
-Tenant posted letter of acceptance (postal rule applies)
-Then, before the letter of acceptance reached the landlord, the tenant posted a letter of
revocation (postal rule does not apply)
