INVITATION TO TREAT
UNITED STATES
In United States the invitation to treat is known as invitation to bargain. Invitation to bargain in the US also same as invitation to treat in UK, because the primary sources of the US law is from English common law, case law, statutes and the constitution. Therefore, the English common law was used as foundation of the US law. The UK and US lawyers break down the procedure of contract information into three steps, which are invitation to treat (invitation to bargain in US), offer, and acceptance. The different between these three parts are not easily distinguised. For example, when people see the goods for sale in the shop window, people maybe think that the seller is offering to sell the goods to them. But, …show more content…
Pepsico, Inc. – Case Brief Summary
Summary of Leonard v. Pepsico, Inc., 88 F.Supp.2d 116 (S.D.N.Y. 1999), aff’d 210 F.3d 88 (2d Cir. 2000).
Facts:
Pepsico (Defendant) ran a promotion campaign where consumers were requested to get “Pepsi Points” by purchasing Pepsi products, in order to exchange them for “Pepsi Stuff”. Leonard (Plaintiff) received a catalogue for use in redeeming “Pepsi Points”. Television advertisements featured goods available through the promotion which includs a Harrier Jet. Leonard saw the advertisements and thought that the commercial constituted a valid offer to get the jet for 7,000,000 Pepsi Points.
Leonard obtained a catalogue and noticed that the order form did not include the Harrier Jet. The catalogue stated that goods could only be ordered via the original order form. The form also stated that additional points could be bought for ten cents each. Leonard raised $700,000 in order to purchase the 7,000,000 points needed to acquire the jet.
Leonard give in a completed order form together with a cheque and wrote in “1 Harrier Jet” at the bottom of the form. Leonard indicated that the cheque was for the express purpose of purchasing the points needed to obtain a new Harrier jet as advertised in the …show more content…
Whether something constitutes an offer is determined under the objective reasonable person standard.
2. No. The general rule is that an advertisement does not constitute an offer.
HELD:
• The court held that in this case, no reasonable person could have concluded that the commercial constituted an offer for a Harrier jet. And also included that, whether an offer was made depends on the objective reasonableness of the supposed offeree’s belief that the advertisement or solicitation was intended to be an offer.
• The court held that it was clear that no serious offer for a Harrier jet was made by Pepsico
• The court noted that the commercial itself was highly unbelievable because the youth featured could barely be trusted with the keys to his parents’ car, much less the prize aircraft of the United States Marine Corps.
• The court stated that the notion of traveling to school in a Harrier jet was exaggerated adolescent fantasy. Furthermore the actual cost of the jet exceeded $23 million and the offer was therefore
UNITED STATES
In United States the invitation to treat is known as invitation to bargain. Invitation to bargain in the US also same as invitation to treat in UK, because the primary sources of the US law is from English common law, case law, statutes and the constitution. Therefore, the English common law was used as foundation of the US law. The UK and US lawyers break down the procedure of contract information into three steps, which are invitation to treat (invitation to bargain in US), offer, and acceptance. The different between these three parts are not easily distinguised. For example, when people see the goods for sale in the shop window, people maybe think that the seller is offering to sell the goods to them. But, …show more content…
Pepsico, Inc. – Case Brief Summary
Summary of Leonard v. Pepsico, Inc., 88 F.Supp.2d 116 (S.D.N.Y. 1999), aff’d 210 F.3d 88 (2d Cir. 2000).
Facts:
Pepsico (Defendant) ran a promotion campaign where consumers were requested to get “Pepsi Points” by purchasing Pepsi products, in order to exchange them for “Pepsi Stuff”. Leonard (Plaintiff) received a catalogue for use in redeeming “Pepsi Points”. Television advertisements featured goods available through the promotion which includs a Harrier Jet. Leonard saw the advertisements and thought that the commercial constituted a valid offer to get the jet for 7,000,000 Pepsi Points.
Leonard obtained a catalogue and noticed that the order form did not include the Harrier Jet. The catalogue stated that goods could only be ordered via the original order form. The form also stated that additional points could be bought for ten cents each. Leonard raised $700,000 in order to purchase the 7,000,000 points needed to acquire the jet.
Leonard give in a completed order form together with a cheque and wrote in “1 Harrier Jet” at the bottom of the form. Leonard indicated that the cheque was for the express purpose of purchasing the points needed to obtain a new Harrier jet as advertised in the …show more content…
Whether something constitutes an offer is determined under the objective reasonable person standard.
2. No. The general rule is that an advertisement does not constitute an offer.
HELD:
• The court held that in this case, no reasonable person could have concluded that the commercial constituted an offer for a Harrier jet. And also included that, whether an offer was made depends on the objective reasonableness of the supposed offeree’s belief that the advertisement or solicitation was intended to be an offer.
• The court held that it was clear that no serious offer for a Harrier jet was made by Pepsico
• The court noted that the commercial itself was highly unbelievable because the youth featured could barely be trusted with the keys to his parents’ car, much less the prize aircraft of the United States Marine Corps.
• The court stated that the notion of traveling to school in a Harrier jet was exaggerated adolescent fantasy. Furthermore the actual cost of the jet exceeded $23 million and the offer was therefore