Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
treat
Normally it is fairly easy to distinguish between an offer
and in invitation to treat, but sometimes it can be be
very difficult to distinguish between them.
Basically it depends primarily on the intention with which
a statement is made.
It is important to understand that it is not the subjective
intentions of the parties that determine the legal effect of
their words or actions but the objective inference from
them (Smith v Hughes (1871)). That is to say, the offer is
interpreted according to an objective intention the
interpretation the reasonable person in the position of the
offeree would place upon the statement or action of the
offeror. This is crucial in answering the basic question
what is an offer? See Centrovincial Estates v Merchant
Investors Assurance Company (1983) regarding the
objective requirement. An offer is an expression of
willingness to contract on certain terms. It must be made
with the intention that it will become binding upon
acceptance. There must be no further negotiations or
discussions required. The nature of an offer is illustrated
and encapsulated by two cases involving the same
defendant, Manchester City Council. The Council decided
to sell houses that it owned to sitting tenants. In two
cases, the claimants entered into agreements with the
Council. The Council then resolved not to sell housing
unless it was contractually bound to do so. In these two
cases the question arose as to whether or not the Council
had entered into a contract. In one case, Storer v
Manchester City Council (1974), the Court of Appeal found
that there was a binding contract. The Council had sent
Storer a communication that they intended would be
binding upon his acceptance. All Storer had to do to bind
himself to the later sale was to sign the document and
return it. In contrast, however, in Gibson v Manchester City
Council (1979), the Council sent Gibson a document which
asked him to make a formal invitation to buy and stated