Offer V Invitation to Treat

779 Words4 Pages
The principle area that this question is concerned with is that of contractual formation. One will assess whether there has been an offer matched to a corresponding acceptance in the Case of Charlie and Rose, or whether Charlie’s letter was merely an invitation to treat. The third significant issue to look at is if a contract was then formed between C and R, would Charlie be in breach of this contract when he sells the ring to a third party. A consideration of the nature surrounding these issues and their application to these facts would be relevant in determining these matters. First it is relevant to differentiate whether Charlie’s letter constituted the requisite terms to be an offer or an invitation to treat. The former rest with the criteria outlined in the case of Storer v Manchester City Council (1974) where it was outlined that an offer should possess the requisite intention to create a legal obligation, one in which the promisee can reasonably rely on. The latter, differs in that it is an invitation to make an offer or to commence negotiations. In this case, an offer has clearly been made by Charlie to sell his diamond ring to Rose for 700 pounds. His letter was precise and sufficiently definite he also indicated in this letter his specific price term. His statement “let me know as quickly as possible” would appear as though he is willing to create contractual relations with Rose. For a contract to be formed there must be an acceptance of the offer, this acceptance proves that each party involved in the contract agrees to the terms of the contract. It can be therefore argued that when Rose presented her terms when accepting Charlie’s offer, this counter offer would not be valid for acceptance. To be an offer (whether an original offer or a counter offer), a statement must contain a promise or promises as was indicated in Harvey v Facey So the question

More about Offer V Invitation to Treat

Open Document