Case Analysis : V Carbolic Smokeball Company Ltd.

Most time, acceptance would be made in clear and loud matters, such as saying “Yes, I accept.” But silence would constitute acceptance of an offer where the common-law and statutory law allows. Supreme Court of Nebraska has confirmed in Joseph Heiting and Sons v. Jacks Bean Co that acceptance may be established by silence or inaction of an offeree and acceptance occurs when the buyer/offeree “does any act inconsistent with the seller/offeror’s ownership...” Neb. U.C.C. section 2-606(1)(c). In Joseph Heiting and Sons v. Jacks Bean Co, 463 N.W.2d 817, 236 Neb. 765 (Neb.,1990), Heiting (Plaintiff) offered to sell its beans at the posted price on September 30, 1987, but was never informed of acceptance or rejection of the offer. Heiting and Jacks

There is consideration present here since according to the ‘Doctrine of Consideration, ' promises will legally enforceable if you ‘ask for something in return for ' something else. Here, Ken asks for £12,000 in return for his work to build Jack 's conservatory. Therefore, when Jack ‘accordingly contacts Ken to say that he will be employing him to do the building work, ' Jack has accepted Ken 's offer, and both parties have entered into a legally binding contract. Jack 's statement qualifies as an acceptance since there is correspondence between the two parties, whereby both the offer and acceptance are on the same terms; there is nexus, where the acceptance is in response to the offer; and finally, there is communication on both parts. Moreover, when Jack states that he will accept the ‘most competitive ' tender, he could argue that the recommendation from ‘Barnie, ' his ‘neighbour ' who expresses that ‘Ken is an excellent builder ' constitutes Jack 's meaning of the ‘most competitive. ' However, this is not relevant unless Bob wishes to argue in court that Jack 's proposal was indeed an invitation to tender, which constitutes an offer, as according to Harvela.

From year-end 2004 through the first-quarter 2008, defendant Brian Fox misled the investing public by fraudulently inflating the revenue and assets and fraudulently omitting major liabilities, of Powder River Petroleum International, Inc. (“Powder River” or the “company”) in the company’s Commission filings, and by making other false and misleading public disclosures. From year-end 2004, Powder River conveyed working interests in oil and gas leases to investors in Asia for over $43 million. Because Powder River promised full repayment of the working interest

Advanced Fuels Corporation (AFC) was founded five years ago by Dr. Zachary Aplin. In the fourth year of research he and his two –member staff made a major break-through that can convert grain waste products into ethanol which can mix with gasoline to produce a better burning automobile fuel. Producing ethanol from waste products would lower its cost dramatically so the market potential of the blended fuel would be increased. After AFC receiving a patent for Dr. Aplin’s unique ethanol production process he decided to broaden the scope of operations of the company but he doesn’t have additional funds to put in. So, he developed

1. Is there a valid offer? Offer an offer is the manifestation of a willingness to enter into a bargain, in must be done in such a way that another person should understand that his assent to that bargain is invited and will conclude in forming a contract. Pete has to show that Debbie made a promise to him something in exchange for him to do or not to do something than a valid offer will be proven

This case was actually pretty interesting to me. I can’t help but wonder if the 5’7 height requirement was really the only reason that the airlines didn’t have any female pilots prior to this incident. I find that hard to believe so it makes me think that there is some validity to the plaintiff’s case. However as I read more into the matter the evidence indicated that the height requirement had more to do with being able to effectively operate the plane, yet it still had a disparate impact on women. I think back to the Hitchman Coal & Coke Co. v. Mitchell case we read about last week where the court decided that the employer is free to require its employees to stay out of the union in order to keep their jobs (Twomey, 2013). It makes me question

There was insufficient evidence to demonstrate that Barnes did understand the label to constitute a representation in the form suggested. It was found that Glendale was negligent and in all circumstances, it was considered there was a duty on Glendale to include in the packaging a warning as to the consequences of using corrosive product with hot water in a confined space such as a drain. There was no specific defect with the caustic soda but the issue is whether it was defective within the meaning of Section 75AC. It was found by the court the label to be defective within the meaning of section 75AC.

The offer and acceptance model is flawed- only an agreement is necessary. In order to fully comprehend this statement, we must first establish what constitutes and offer and what constitutes acceptance. “An offer is a statement by one party of willingness to enter into a contract on stated terms, provided that these terms are, in turn, accepted by the party to whom the offer is addressed”. Acceptance is “…an unqualified expression of ascent to the terms proposed by the offeror”. The “Offer and acceptance model” is based on the court’s adopt the “mirror image” rule of contractual formation. Applying the definitions stated above, we can take this to mean that there must be a clear and unequivocal offer which must be matched by an equally

3. An offer. An offer occurs when a party communicates the intention of doing something if the other party does another specific thing. Either the buyer or seller can initiate an offer so it could occur when you approach a cranberry cooperative with an

1. Signs of opiate toxidrome that this patient is exhibiting includes: hypothermia, bradycardia, hypotension, bradypnea, hypoxia, miosis, and unresponsiveness.

Market leadership and technological innovation have marked Sealed Air's participation in the U.S. protective packaging market. Several small regional producers have introduced products, which are less effective than Sealed Air's but similar in appearance and cheaper. The company must determine its response to this new competition. The company is faced with a difficult choice of choosing from a range of feasible options ranging from doing nothing to introducing a new product. This has raised product line management issues, particularly cannibalization, and affords the opportunity for the development of a marketing plan for any new product introduction. The timing of launch and any change in policies for Air Cap

Maitland Motor has been a dealer of Lincoln Mercury and Ford in Twin Cities for nearly 15 years. Maitland Motor has been seen as a successful dealer with a good financial base since went through its difficult period. What have made the dealer has had a good base in financial resource is its contribution with a beneficial set of Automobile and trucks leases with two divisions of Wisconsin National, Inc.: Universal Specialty Steel and Mid South Tool and Die. This case involves the two main persons, who are responsible fore the situation: Bruce Maitland; owner of the Maitland Motor and Chuck Harper;

The leading cases, CIR v Mitsubishi Motors Ltd [1995] and Commissioner of Taxation v James Flood Pty Ltd [1953] that reflect a taxpayer

The ratio decidendi means the principles of law on which the decision is founded. In the case of Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co Ltd (1892). The ratio decidendi in this case was that the advertisement was a unilateral contract, whereby, the Carbolic Smoke Ball Company made a promise to perform an obligation. The fact that the Carbolic Smoke Ball Company deposited £1000 with the Alliance Bank demonstrated intent of that promise and therefore it was not a ‘mere puff’. Communication of acceptance of the offer was not necessary in this case as Mrs Carlill accepted the offer from her conduct, in that, she purchased the smoke ball and performed the conditions of using the smoke ball as outlined on the advertisement. It was also established

Hanover-Bates Chemical Corporation produces chemicals for the chemical plating industry. It has plants in Los Angeles, Houston, Chicago, and Newark. The production process involves taking chemicals purchased from other suppliers and mixing them into user-based formulas. The Hanover-Bates has a strong balance sheet and trades on the over-the-counter market. There are seven sales districts within the organization with a total of forty sales representatives. Each receives a salary, fringe benefits, and commissions of 0.5 percent of their dollar sales volume up to their sales quota. Field sales efforts are extremely important and quality control is critical with supplying the plater with the