The Postal System As A Method Of Communication

The particular focus of this essay is on how terms are implied. This is central because the courts intervene and impose implied terms when they believe that in addition to the terms the parties have expressly agreed on, other terms must be implied into the contract. Gillies argued that the courts have become more interventionist in protecting the rights of contracting parties thereby encroaching upon the notion of freedom of contract. The doctrine of freedom of contract is a prevailing philosophy which upholds the idea that parties to a contract should be at liberty to agree on their own terms without the interference of the courts or legislature. Implied terms can be viewed as a technique of construction or interpretation of contracts. It has been argued that the courts are interfering too much in their approach to determine and interpret the terms of a contract. The aim of this essay is to explore this argument further and in doing so consider whether freedom of contract is lost due to courts imposing implied terms. The essay will outline how the common law implies terms. The final part of the essay will examine whether Parliament, by means of a statute, or terms implied by custom restrict freedom in a contract. An overall conclusion on the issue will be reached.

According to a Case Study-United States Postal Service (Jan 06, 2010), retrieved from: http://www.slideshare.net/bakeursilly/usps; since 1175 when Benjamin Franklin was appointed as the first postmaster general of the United States, the agency known as the United States Postal Service (USPS) has grown to become an institution that delivers about half of the world’s mail in snow, rain, and the dark of the night. Employing about 656,000 workers and 218,684 vehicles, 36,496 total retail and delivery facilities nationwide, 599 processing facilities, 584 million pieces is the average volume per day, and a total work hour of 1,258,025 per year delivering over 200 billion items per year via air and highway.

i. Virtually instantaneous  general rule should apply (ie. contract is formed when the offeree’s acceptance is received by the offeror; per Lord Wilberforce in Brinkibon)4;

The principle of law is that for a valid contract to be formed there must be an agreement reached by both parties.

Manifestation: Acceptance of an offer requires a communication of the acceptance to the offeror from the offeree so in order to satisfy the mutual assent requirement. Pete acceptance could be inferred through his statement No problem you can let me know sometime within the next two weeks.

Moreover, as per Denning LJ, in Storer v Manchester City Council heard in the House of Lords, one does not look into the mind or intention of an individual to enter a contract, but in what “he said and did” which resulted into the formation of a contact. (Denning, LJ, 1974) Based on the Adams v Lindsell case, that was heard on June 5th 1818 in the Court of Kings Bench, one can conclude that a contract has been formed when the letter was posted by Albert. Furthermore, as per section 4 of the Sale of Goods Act 1979,a contract is “made in writing (either with or without seal), or by word of mouth, or partly in writing and partly by word of mouth, or may be implied from the conduct of the parties” (parliament.uk, 1979)

The United States Postal Service (USPS) is the most recent association making a move to abstain from getting its fingers smoldered with regards to hoverboards.

As per 14 (1), Electronic Transactions Act 1999 (Cth), which are powerful in the recipient 's server clarifies that in the wake of having sent through email affirmation. Thus, once it was clear that the offeror does not check email, offeror "s dynamic server clarifies that an understanding came to.

As stated in the Gould Commercial Code Section 2-207 subsection 1, “A definite and seasonable expression of acceptance or a written confirmation which is sent within a reasonable time operates as an acceptance even though it states terms additional to or different from those offered or agreed upon, unless acceptance is expressly made conditional on assent to

This letter gave me a new perspective on how history had played out, making me rethink about how important information had to be traveled and the protection of valuable documents that must be kept intact. This makes me realize the importance of messengers and how it's crucial that they must relay their messages to one another for things to run smoothly.

In BROGDEN v METROPOLITAN RAIL CO it was held the railway company had accepted by placing orders since the amendment of the document, and in TRENTHAM LTD v ARCHITAL LUXFER the court used the 'reasonable man' to identify whether or not there has been acceptance. Both cases seemed to have reasonable outcomes; therefore the courts had been provided with satisfactory rules to help them reach a appropriate verdict. There are various different rules regarding acceptance. There must be a communication of acceptance from the offeree to the offeror. The case of YATES BUILDING v PULLEYN deals whether there had been a prescribed acceptance or not. It was held that there was no practical difference to the offeror therefore the acceptance method was binding. However in the case of ENTORES LTD v MILES FAR EAST CORPORATION there was no prescribed acceptance, yet it was held that the contract was formed in England as that was there acceptance had been received by telex. Other rules that can be used to decide whether there has been acceptance include a waiver of communication of acceptance; silence, which isn't a valid acceptance; ignorance, generally there isn't a binding contract; and acceptance via post using the postal rule. The postal rule can often be misused, as it states that a contract has been formed as

A Contract requires several elements in order to be considered enforceable. However for the purpose of this essay we would explore one of these elements in order to effectively understand the controversial cases of Williams v Roffey Brothers and Nicholls (contractors) Ltd (1990) and Stilk v Myrick (1804). Before going any further one should briefly understand the doctrine of Consideration. Despite the vast amount of content written, the doctrine of consideration is still to this day unclear due to the inconsistency of the courts and its application of necessary rules. Consideration refers to that which the law deems as valuable in that the promisor receives from the promise that which was promised. In other words, it is the exchange of something of value between the parties in a contract. One should be mindful that in English law, every promise may not be legally enforceable; it requires the court to distinguish between are enforceable and non-enforceable obligations. This brings us to the controversial cases of Stilk v Myrick and Williams v the Roffery brothers. Many argue that that the case of Williams was wrongly decided leading to impairments in the rule initially established in Stilk v Myrick. This essay seek to analyse and critique the cases of Stilk v Myrick and Williams v Roffey Brothers and also highlight whether or not the new rule of Practical benefit lead to serious impairments in later cases.

This contingency plan is designed to document functions performed and limitations to personal and official mail postal services in the event the main facility is no longer usable. This plan will provide general guidelines on postal responsibilities during

The postal rule was developed to facilitate contracting at a distance. Initially, bargaining at a distance often posed a great challenge to bargaining parties especially through the postal services. This was mainly because via the mail parties could not know simultaneously whether they had reached an agreement. As a result a general rule indicating the time of an acceptance had to be established. Consequently the postal acceptance rule was developed .The postal rule function to create an exception to the general rule, which stipulates that an acceptance will only be effective upon receipt

Conceptually, reasonable expectations of honest men and sanctity of contract are not in conflict. Indeed, they often point to the same direction – it is the reasonable expectation of an honest man that an agreement should be executed. Although it is observed that the two themes usually work side by side, this essay argues that in regards to the rules of acceptance of unilateral contracts, the English courts place more emphasis on reasonable expectations when making decisions.