Acceptance A03

Question 1

silence can’t amount to acceptance

Answer 1

this is a fair rule but may not reflect the actual intentions of the party - we see this in Felthouse v Bindley where the nephew wished to accept but this intention was defeated by a technicality

Question 2

Acceptance by different means

Answer 2

acceptance may be by different means other than the ones specified if the offeror is not disadvantaged leaves a lot of discretion to the judge as to what is a onerous for the business - this is not objective and is unreliable - also judges aren’t elected so its undemocratic

Question 3

counter offer v mere enquiry

Answer 3

the difference between what is considered a counter offer and a mere enquiry is outlined by the case of Stevenson v Mclean (where they requested information about the delivery but the price and quality was already agreed) - the case of Hyde v Wrench (introduced new terms by changing the price) defines a counter offer

Question 4

Revocation

Answer 4

• once accepted it is difficult to revoke and there is no clear guidelines on whether overtaking a posted acceptance with a revocation sent by faster means will be permitted - although revocation needing to be before acceptance is clear
• the public and small businesses may lack knowledge of these rules and not understand why offer and acceptance is different or when the postal rule applies

Question 5

Reforms

Answer 5

1) unless explicitly adopted by parties the postal rule should be abolished - no longer relevant as its out of date
2) standardised business hours can be adopted by the courts for communications to be more easily received - these could also be explicitly agreed upon or excluded
3) Disregard consideration for promises to revoke an offer - similar thing done in privity