Contract Law

Front 1

AGREEMENT

Back 1

Offer and Acceptance

Front 2

Which case demonstrates that an advertisement is not an offer but an invitation to treat?

Back 2

Partridge v Crittenden

Front 3

Which case, from America, demonstrates that an advertisement may constitute an offer if it is specific about quantity, stock and number of customers that can accept the offer?

Back 3

Lefkowitz v Great Minneapolis Surplus Store

Front 4

Which case established that displaying items in a shop is not an offer but an ITT?

Back 4

Pharmaceutical Society of GB v Boots

Front 5

Which case demonstrates that a shop window display is not an offer but an ITT?

Back 5

Fisher v Bell

Front 6

Which case shows that acceptance of a unilateral offer to the world can be made by performance and not necessarily communicated?

Back 6

Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball

Front 7

Which case shows that a counter-offer extinguishes the original offer?

Back 7

Hyde v Wrench

Front 8

Which case shows that an inquiry does not extinguish an offer?

Back 8

Stevenson v McLean

Front 9

Which case established the Postal Rule?

Back 9

Adams v Lindsell

Front 10

Which case shows that the Postal Rule does not apply to revocation of an offer?

Back 10

Henthorn v Fraser

Front 11

Which case shows that the Postal Rule applies even if the acceptance letter is lost in the mail?

Back 11

Household Fire Insurance v Grant

Front 12

Which case shows that the Postal Rule does not apply to acceptance by telex?

Back 12

Entores v Miles Far East Corporation

Front 13

Which case shows that revocation of an offer is effective if the offeree finds out about it through a third party?

Back 13

Dickinson v Dodds

Front 14

Which case shows that a unilateral contract cannot be revoked once the offeree has started performance of the contract?

Back 14

Errington v Errington

Front 15

INTENTION TO CREATE LEGAL RELATIONS

Back 15

In order for a contract to be enforceable, there must be an intention by the parties to create legal relations

Front 16

In family dealings, what is the presumption regarding ITCLR and which case demonstrates this?

Back 16

Presumption that there is no ITCLR.

Balfour v Balfour

Front 17

What is the presumption regarding ITCLR in business dealings and which case demonstrates it?

Back 17

Edwards v Skyways

Front 18

What is required to rebut the presumption of ITCLR in business dealings and which case demonstrates this?

Back 18

There must be an explicit statement that there is no ITCLR.

Esso Petroleum v Commissioners of Customs and Excise

(soccer coin case)

Front 19

What is the principle of certainty?

Back 19

The courts cannot enforce a contract if the terms are too uncertain.

Front 20

CONSIDERATION

Back 20

In order for a promise to be enforceable, that promise must be supported by consideration.

Front 21

What is consideration and which case demonstrates this?

Back 21

Any benefit gained by the promising party or detriment suffered by the other.

Currie v Misa

Front 22

Which case shows that consideration can be something of no value to the receiver?

Back 22

Chappell v Nestle

(candy wrappers case)

Front 23

What is the presumption regarding past consideration and which case demonstrates it?

Back 23

An act coming before a promise cannot serve as consideration for that promise.

Roscorla v Thomas (quality of horse promised after the fact)

Front 24

What is the exception to the presumption against past consideration and which case demonstrates it?

Back 24

Past consideration can be good consideration where work was done previously on the assumption that the worker would be repaid. A promise for repayment afterwards can be enforced with the work as consideration.

Re Casey's Patents

Front 25

Which case demonstrates that performance of an existing public duty is not good consideration?

Back 25

Collins v Godefroy

Front 26

Which case shows that where a public duty is exceeded it can be good consideration?

Back 26

Glasbrook v Glamorgan

Front 27

Which case shows that a promise to perform a contractual duty to a third party is good consideration?

Back 27

Shadwell v Shadwell (uncle promised nephew payments if he married)

Front 28

Which case shows that a promise to perform a contractual duty already owed to the promisor is not good consideration?

Back 28

Stilk v Myrick (ship crew case)

Front 29

Which case demonstrates that performance of a contractual duty to the promisor can be consideration if there is a practical benefit gained?

Back 29

Williams v Roffey Bros

Front 30

Which case shows that part payment of a debt before the due date is not good consideration for discharging the whole debt?

Back 30

Re Selectmove

Front 31

What is the key case in Promissory Estoppel?

Back 31

Central London Property v High Trees

Front 32

What are the three requirements for promissory estoppel?

Back 32

Clear and unequivocal promise

Must be inequitable for the promisor to go back on their promise

There must be reliance on that promise

Front 33

Which case shows that estoppel only works as a shield, not a sword?

Back 33

Combe v Combe

Front 34

CONTRACTUAL TERMS I

Back 34

Conditions, Warranties, and Innominate Terms

Front 35

What is the difference between a condition and a warranty?

Back 35

A condition is a central obligation of the contract. A warranty is a contractual promise other than the central obligation.

Front 36

Which two cases about singers demonstrate the difference between a condition and a warranty?

Back 36

Poussard v Spiers (actress couldn't perform - condition)

Bettini v Gye (singer missed some rehearsals - warranty)

Front 37

What is an innominate term?

Back 37

A term where the effects of breach could vary and which may be held to be a condition or a warranty depending on the breach.

Front 38

What was the ruling in Hong Kong Fir?

Back 38

The term that the ship was "in every way fitted for ordinary cargo service" was an innominate term. The breach had not been serious enough to repudiate the whole contract, and was treated as a warranty rather than a condition.

Front 39

What is Reynolds' argument against using the threefold distinction of terms and instead only classifying terms as conditions and "other terms"?

Back 39

Sometimes a breach of warranty can give a party a right to repudiate the contract as a whole, so there is no real difference between warranties and innominate terms.

Front 40

What is Peel's argument for maintaining the threefold distinction?

Back 40

There is a difference between warranties and innominate terms, in that in warranties there is a prima facie rule towards remedies in damages, whereas there is no such rule for innominate terms.

Front 41

CONTRACTUAL TERMS II

Back 41

Incorporation

Front 42

What is the difference between a breach of a representation vs a breach of a term?

Back 42

The first gives rise to Misrepresentation. The second gives rise to Breach of Contract.

Front 43

Which case shows that the more important the -pre-contractual statement, the more likely it is to be a term?

Back 43

Bannerman v White

Front 44

Which case requires that reasonable notice be given for a term to be incorporated?

Back 44

Parker v South Eastern Railway (checked luggage case; terms printed on ticket)

Front 45

Which case stipulates that notice be given before a contract is formed?

Back 45

Olley v Marlborough Court (hotel case)

Front 46

Which case shows that a term can be incorporated by a common course of dealings or general trade practice?

Back 46

British Crane v Ipswich Plant

Front 47

Which case deals with Entire Agreement Clauses?

Back 47

Inntrepreneur v East Crown

Front 48

By what two tests might a term be implied in fact and which cases deals with each?

Back 48

Business efficacy test (Moorcock)

Officious bystander test (Shirlaw v Southern Foundries)

Front 49

MISREPRESENTATION

Back 49

False statements giving rise to remedies

Front 50

What is the principle for Misrepresentation and which case evidences this?

Back 50

There must have been an unambiguous false statement.

Dimmlock v Hallett (mere sales talk puff is not misrepresentation)

Front 51

What is the exception to the rule that a mere opinion is not misrepresentation and which case deals with it?

Back 51

It may be misrepresentation if the party making the statement had greater knowledge or a duty to provide correct information.

Esso Petroleum v Marden (negligent estimation of oil proceeds)

Front 52

Which case deals with fraudulent misrepresentation?

Back 52

Derry v Peeks

Front 53

What two types of remedies are available for misrepresentation?

Back 53

Rescission and Damages

Front 54

NON EST FACTUM, DURESS AND UNDUE INFLUENCE

Back 54

Non est factum: makes a contract VOID

Duress and UI: makes a contract VOIDABLE

Front 55

What is non est factum?

Back 55

"This is not my deed"

Someone did not actually agree to what they thought they were agreeing to

Front 56

What are the two requirements of non est factum and which case deals with them?

Back 56

Negligence - the person has to have taken reasonable measures to ensure they were signing what they thought. (i.e. asking the contract to be read to them.)

The contract must be fundamentally different than what they thought.

Saunders v Anglia Building Society

Front 57

What are the three types of duress?

Back 57

Duress of the person

Duress of goods

Economic duress

Front 58

What is the requirement for duress of the person and which case deals with it?

Back 58

If duress of person was a factor in a person's decision, it renders the contract voidable even if they may have signed the contract anyway.

Barton v Armstrong

Front 59

What are the two requirements for economic duress and which case deals with them?

Back 59

Compulsion of the Will and Illegitimate Pressure

The Universe Sentinel

Front 60

Which case used to be the leading authority on UI? What was its classification?

Back 60

Aboody

Class 1 and Class 2 (A and B)

Front 61

Which case has since replaced Aboody as the key UI authority?

Back 61

Etridge

Front 62

What are the two requirements for undue influence under Etridge?

Back 62

A relationship of trust and confidence, either through the automatic presumption of a former Class 2(A) relationship or through evidence relating to the specific relationship, AND

A transaction that calls for an explanation

Front 63

What is a bank put on when it knows the relationship between a debtor and a surety is non-commercial?

Back 63

The bank is put on inquiry.

Front 64

What reasonable steps must a bank take when it is put on inquiry?

Back 64

It must ensure the wife receives independent legal advice from a solicitor and that the solicitor is given all relevant financial information.