Moot Speech

1154 Words Nov 17th, 2014 5 Pages
As your lady is aware the advertisement identified that the offer was to remain open until the end of March. One would likely presume this meant the offer was open until the 31st of the month and this was the day on which the appellant expressed his wish to withdraw his offer. The 31st however fell upon a Saturday, a day on which the shop was closed for trading.
The law in question must therefore consider if the remained open until the last day of March or the offer did in fact finish on the last day of trading in march, which would have been Friday the 30th.
The Court of Appeal Case of Dickson and Dodds as reported in ********* held that if an offer clearly states it is open until a certain date, it may be withdrawn at any point
…show more content…
Although this case involved an invitation to tender and not an invitation to treat, of notable significance, was that the defendant was bound to check the mail on the last day. And as he did not, he was found to be at fault.
Although emphasis was placed on the above case concerning a tender, and not an offer, similarities between the case details are evident. Although respondent is not bound to consider all offers as a result of an invitation to treat, due to him already entering into part negotiations by stating he would consider the appellants offer. The respondent may therefore be bound to check the post on the final day of the offer incase any letters had arrived from the appellant. Further emphasis may be placed on this, due to the fact that one of his offers had been made via postal communication. Therefore it is likely that further means of communication from the appellant would also likely to be in the form of postal communication.
It is notable that the Law of contract adopts an objective approach when identifying if the parties can be seen to have come to an agreement. Thus an objective assessment is made of the content of their agreement, and an interpretation to be put on the language by which it was constituted.
In the ****** case of Centrovincial Estates Plc V Merchant Investors Assurance

More about Moot Speech