115.103 Contracts

Front 1

Jones V Padavatton

Back 1

Presumption: NO intention to create legal relations between parents and children.

Front 2

Definition of a CONTRACT

Back 2

An agreement between 2 or more parties to which the courts will give legal effect

Front 3

3 essential elements of a valid contract

Back 3

1) intention to create legal relations, 2) offer and acceptance, 3) consideration

Front 4

Barriers to the formation of valid and effective contracts

Back 4

1) form 2) lack of capacity 3) lack of genuine consent 4) illegality

Front 5

Intention to create legal relations - family

Back 5

If family there is no presumtipn that they intend to be legally bound

Front 6

Spellman v Spellman

Back 6

Aggrmt between spouses not legally binding unless can prove otherwise. This case - not proven. Onus on plantiff to prove.

Front 7

Felthouse v Bindley

Back 7

Case - Silence can not be a valid mode of acceptance. The offeror can not cast onto the offeree

Front 8

Carlill V Carbolic Smoke Ball Company

Back 8

wording in advts can move from Invit to treat to become an offer

Front 9

Adams v Lindsell

Back 9

Postal Rule - acceptance is complete when posted.

Front 10

Definition of consideration

Back 10

That something must be given in return for the act or promise

Front 11

4 factors that might vitiate a valid contract

Back 11

Form, Capacity, lack of genuine consent, Illegality.

Front 12

3 forms of lack of genuine consent

Back 12

Duress ( undue influence or unconscionable bargin). Mistake. Misrepsentation. Illegality

Front 13

legislation governing credit contracts

Back 13

Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act 2003

Front 14

Legislation governing electronic transactions

Back 14

Electronic Transactions Act 2002

Front 15

Section of ETA 2002 regarding timing of emails (sent or received)

Back 15

ETA 2002, section 11

Front 16

Legislation concerning Minors

Back 16

Minors contracts act 1969

Front 17

Definition of a minor

Back 17

any person who has not yet attained 18 years of age.

Front 18

Section of Minors contracts Act 1969 thataplies to contracts

Back 18

Section 6

Front 19

what is past consideration?

Back 19

Does not result in the making of a contract, where the act is provided prior to the promise being made.

Front 20

Hunt v Bate 1568

Back 20

past consideration does not make a contract except where the act is prerequested

Front 21

2 principles of consideration

Back 21

1) consideration need not be accurate. 2) consideration must be real

Front 22

what is a simple contract

Back 22

need not be in writting can be a verbal agreement

Front 23

Diff between contracts made in writting and contracts evidenced in writting

Back 23

Made in writting - ie property, evidenced in writting - oral then later recorded

Front 24

Gibson v Manchester City Council

Back 24

Gibson v Manchester City Council [1979] UKHL 6 is an English contract law case in which the House of Lords strongly reasserted that agreement only exists when there is a clear offer mirrored by a clear acceptance.

Front 25

Hyde v Wrench

Back 25

A counter offer amounts to a rejection of the original offer.

Front 26

Stevenson, Jacques & Co. v McLean (1880) 5 QBD 346:

Back 26

the offeree seeks clarification of the offer or further information about it from the offeror. In such a case the offer is not to be regarded as rejected and it is still open to the offeree to accept it.

Front 27

Tinn v Hoffmann & Co

Back 27

No agreement arises from cross-offers even when these are made in identical terms

Front 28

unilateral contract example

Back 28

Carlill V Carbolic Smoke Ball co

Front 29

Felthouse V Bindley

Back 29

Silence can not be construed as acceptance

Front 30

Case :counter offer than kills the original ?

Back 30

Hyde v Wrench

Front 31

An Offeror may revoke an offer b4 it is accepted, but it must be communicated to the offeree but not necessarily by the offeror

Back 31

Dickinson V Dodds

Front 32

Stevenson V Maclean

Back 32

Asking for further information prioir to acceptance is not treated as a counter offer.

Front 33

Felthouse V Bindley

Back 33

Silence is not acceptance of an offer

Front 34

Byrne v Van Tienhoven

Back 34

Revocation must be communicated. The communication of a revoked offer is effective from the time it is received ( not from the time it was posted)

Front 35

Routledge v Grant

Back 35

An offer may be revoked at any time before acceptance even if a time limit is specified

Front 36

Routledge v Grant 1828

Back 36

Offer can be withdrawn (revoked) even if the offeror has promised to keep the offer open for a specified time.

Front 37

Dickinson v Dodds

Back 37

Revocation is only effective when it has been communicated to a third party and may be communicated by a third party as in Dickinson v Dodds 1876 where sale of house offered to Dickinson was told to him by a third party

Front 38

Harvey v Facey

Back 38

Advising a price is an indication not an offer

Front 39

Powierza v Daley

Back 39

An inquiry as to a possible variation of terms is not a counter offer.

Front 40

Brinkibon Ltd v Stahag Stahl

Back 40

Acceptance by instantaneous modes of communication (whether by telex or ph) takes effect when it is received

Front 41

Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists

Back 41

Held : Display was invitation to treat. Sale at cash desk

Front 42

Classification of responses to offers. A reply may be?

Back 42

A reply may be
acceptance
request for information
rejection
counter-offer

Front 43

routledge v grant

Back 43

an offer can be revoked any time b4 acceptance

Front 44

dickinson v dodds

Back 44

revoking offer must be communicated to the oferee before acceptance to be effective.

Front 45

Partridge v crittenden

Back 45

invitation to treat - advertised birds birds

Front 46

Fisher V Bell

Back 46

Invitation to treat - shops display wondow - flick knives

Front 47

Clifton V Palumbo

Back 47

it was held that the words - oferring to sel you" can be a mere statement of price not necessary an offer

Front 48

Balfour v Balfour

Back 48

family arrangements not assumed to be binding

Front 49

Parker v Clark

Back 49

Domestic or Social arrangement can be binding if proven.

Front 50

Bukpitt V oates

Back 50

Social arrangement bewteen friends are not preseumed binding (agree to buy 50% share of lawn mower)

Front 51

Parkenlam v Parkenham

Back 51

family can intend to create legal binding agreements (this was a family loan)

Front 52

Clifton V Palumbo

Back 52

it was held that the words - oferring to sel you" can be a mere statement of price not necessary an offer