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;
6 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Kennedy v Thomassen |
- insurance company offered settlement to insured solicitors - insured completed paperwork to accept - then died - then her solicitors sent to insurers - HELD: - you can't act when you're dead - acceptance must be communicated to the offeror to be effective - unless the offeror waives this right |
|
|
Commerce Commission v Telecom Mobile |
- T used another company to promote their phones and gage interest - Then T would to those who seemed interested a sealed phone and a letter that said breaking the seal amounted to acceptance - ISSUE: where was the contract formed? - HELD: - acceptance occured when the customer broke the seal - THUS by dealing in this way telecom waived their right to communication |
|
|
Allbrite Industries v P&C Gill Contractors |
- posting rules do not apply to telex - an offeror must use very clear words to insist that only the prescribed method of communication may be used - where this occurs attempted acceptance by any other forms will not amount to acceptance - where the prescription is not clear acceptance by any other not less advantageous is permitted |
|
|
Adams v Lindsell |
- POSTING RULE - wool manufacturer - HELD: - where the posting rule applies, an acceptance is effective when posted |
|
|
Holwell Securities v Hughes |
- (Adams v Lindsell) is only to be applied where no particular mode of communication is prescribed by the offeror - will also not apply if it is clear that the negotiating parties intended that a binding agreement did not occur until acceptance was communicated |
|
|
Entores v Miles Far East Corp |
- communication by telex - offeror did not recieve acceptance at his own fault - HELD: - An offeror is estopped from denying agreement where they are at fault for not recieving acceptance - posting rules do not apply to near/instantaneous forms of communication |
