- This topic has 1 reply, 2 voices, and was last updated 7 years ago by
.
- Posts
I am referring to the following post.
https://opentuition.com/topic/contract-28/
1. It is actually from the dec 2014 exam.
2. There is no clue in the sentence that makes it obvious for it to be an offer. In fact, the statement is vague if we compare it with the case of carbolic v smoke ball.
In the case, it was clearly stated that Ann placed an advertising.3. Should I presume that it was in fact an tough question or I am having understanding the concept of offer and invitation to treat wrongly?
Surely this quote from the printed answer explains the thinking behind the conclusion that it is an offer:
“There are occasions, however, when an advert can amount to a genuine offer capable of acceptance by anyone to whom the offer is addressed (Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co (1893)).
The wording of Ann’s advert was in sufficiently categorical terms for it to have been an offer to the world at large, stating her unreserved commitment to enter into a contract with the first person who accepted it”
That expression “… sufficiently categorical terms …” is the justification (the ratio decidendi!) behind the conclusion
If, as I pointed out in my earlier response, the “offer” is worded in such a way as to make it appear to be a genuine offer …
I quote my earlier response:
“It would seem that where such an advert as the one you have quoted looks like it’s making it absolutely clear that it is an offer, then it’s an offer”
I also said in my earlier response that it’s a tricky area … if law were straight forward, there would be no legal profession!
But if a similar question appears in the next exam, you’ll now know the answer!
OK?
- The topic ‘offer’ is closed to new replies.