For faster services, inquiry about  new assignments submission or  follow ups on your assignments please text us/call us on +1 (251) 265-5102

Prescribed manner

prescribed manner and yet cause influenza or other caugohtseindfltudeonzeau.sTehdeididreasewtahsethidise.altwwaasst.hat d you use the smokeball, you wouldn’t get the flu. Now 8 You imagine pad, deposited ,i0.0 with S°”‘”°’ °””ediCh”t smoke ball was supposed ine E100 In 1893, that was an awful its lot of money. So to chow Its sincerity in the matter, the smekeballadvertisement,c bank again in 1893, not a small amount of money Relying on thehe sueds;:::;:ric a smokeball and used it as directed, but she still caught influenza, so shedecision owl e r E100 reward money. And the smokeball company appealed against .orN„ e reward They smokoball company advanced several arguments to defeat. Mrs Carlisle ca f h said that the advertisement was too vague. And that they did not intend to beboutnhdbe arguments y it. So basically they were saying they were going along the lines of merely puffing. Now es were of course rejected by the Court of Appeal, which held that both themeaninegadnedtiefyfftehcet of the advertisement was very clear. They said It was immaterial that Mrs Carlisle did n company of her acceptance before using the smoke ball and catching influenza. The point is. That where an offer takes the form of payment or reward in exchange for a particular act or acts. This is called a unilateral offer and there Is no need for the offeree to notify the offeror of his acceptance. Now. Previously would have considered bilateral contracts where you have to parties, but here in a unilateral contract you don’t need the offeree to notify the offeror of acceptance. Why? Because that type of offer is accepted by performance of the Act or performance of the condition. So, In Carlisle the plaintiff was entitled to the reward because the advertisement of the reward was an offer and has no further bargaining or negotiation was intended by the offeror the court considered it as such being an offer. So, whilst the general rule is that an advertisement is an Invitation to treat if It is couched In terms, which clearly shows that the party advertising intended to be bound by what he said. As in the case of Odd and the carbolic smoke Ball company, then in law it will amount to an offer with legally binding effect.
Let us now consider tenders and the effect of tenders. Tenders again. Asa general rule Will amount to an Invitation to treat. But this is law. Which means, of course, that there will of course be exceptions. Now, which was held in the case of Spencer and Harding in 1870. That’s a statement. That goods are to be sold by tender is not normally an offer, and so no obligation is created to sell to the person making the highest tender. Equally, an invitation for tenders for the supply of goods or services is not generally an offer but an invitation for offers to be submitted, which can then be accepted or rejected, as the case may be. Now, in some circumstances, however, an Invitation to tender may be held to be an offer. In the case of Blackpool and Filed Aero Club. A. Blackpool Borough council in 1990, the Council owned and managed an airport. It raised money by granting a concession to an operator to run pleasure flights. From the airport. Now, shortly before the concession was about to expire in 1983, the Council invited tenders for the right to run the concession. Invitations to bid were sent out to the plaintiff and six other Interested parties The terms of the bids, submissions were that they were to be submitted in an envelope which was provided and should have no mark on it what so ever which could identify the sender. In addition. The tender had to be submitted. No later than 12 noon on the 17th of March 1983. Now the plaintiffs tender was put in the town hall letterbox at 11:00 AM on the 17th of March. However, although the box should have been cleared at noon, this never happened. The plaintiffs tender was then marked down as being submitted late and it was not considered. The plaintiff sued, they sued the Council from breach of contract on the basis that it had warranted. That had a tender been submitted by the deadline it would be considered and that the Council had acted in breach of that warranty The court held on appeal that in certain circumstances. An invitation to


IntaSend Secure Payments (PCI-DSS Compliant) Secured by IntaSend Payments
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, how can I help?