Gibbons versus Proctor Case Analysis

960 Words Jan 29th, 2018 4 Pages
The crux of this question comes under the topic of "Formation of Contract".
In English law, there are four requirements to form a valid contract as stated by Lord Wilberforce in the case of The Eurymedon. There must be offer, acceptance, intention to create legal relations, and consideration in order to form a valid contract. Each elements will have to be considered in David's matter.
First of all, we have to determine whether David's advertisement is an offer or an invitation to treat. Prof GH Treitel defined an offer as an expression of definite willingness to be legally bound on certain and specific terms. By contrast, an invitation to treat is a form of sales gimmick to attract attention and invites someone to negotiate, then make an offer. As a general rule, advertisement will be regarded as an invitation to treat and not an offer. Lord Herschell in the case of Grainger & Son v Gough stated that this is to make business sense otherwise the advertiser could find himself contractually obliged to sell more goods than he in fact owned. Lord Parker CJ had supported the view in Partridge v Crittenden. However, if it is an advertisement made to the whole word which promises to pay a reward in exchange for an act, it is considered to be an offer by reference to Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co and Bowerman v ABTA. Hence, on the present facts, the advertisement placed by…
Open Document