F4学习笔记3Word下载.docx

F4学习笔记3Word下载.docx

《F4学习笔记3Word下载.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《F4学习笔记3Word下载.docx（17页珍藏版）》请在冰点文库上搜索。

Decision:

Thecourtdisagreed.

（a）Thesmokeballmustprotecttheuserduringtheperiodofuse-theofferwasnotvague.

（b）Suchanofferwaspossible,asitcouldbecomparedtorewardcases.

2.ButlerMachineToolCovex-cell-OCorp（England）1979

Thefacts:

Theclaimantofferedtoselltoolstothedefendant.Theirquotationincludeddetailsoftheirstandardterms.Thedefendant'

accepted'

theoffer,enclosingtheirownstandardterms.Theclaimantacknowledgedacceptancebyreturningatear-offslipfromtheorderform.

Decision:

Thedefendant'

sorderwasreallyacounter-offer.Theclaimanthadacceptedthisbyreturningthetear-offslip.

3.BritishSteelCorpsvClevelandBridgeandEngineeringCoLtd1984

Thedefendantsaskedtheclaimantstosupplynodesforacomplexsteellattice-workframe,andsenttheclaimantsaletterofintent,startingtheirintentiontoplaceanorderontheirstandardterms.Theclaimantsstatedthattheywereunwillingtocontractonsuchterms,butstartedwork,andeventuallycompletedanddeliveredallthenodes.Theysuedforthevalueofthenodesandthedefendantscounter-claimedfordamagesforlatedelivery.

Sincethepartieshadnotreachedagreementoversuchmattersaslatedelivery,therewasnocontract,andsotherecouldbenoquestionofdamagesforlatedelivery.However,sincetheclaimantshadundertakenworkattherequestofthedefendantsandthedefendantshadacceptedthiswork,theclaimantswereentitledtoareasonableremunerationforservicesrendered.

4.GreatNorthernRailwaysvWitham1873

Thedefendanttenderedsuccessfullyforthesupplyofstorestotheclaimantoveraperiodofoneyear.Inhistenderheundertook‘tosupply...suchquantitiesasthecompanymayorderfromtimetotime’.Aftermakingsomedeliveriesherefusedtofulfillanorderwhichtheclaimanthadgiven.

Hewasinbreachofcontractinrefusingtofulfilltheordergivenbutmightrevokehistenderandneednotthenfulfillanyfutureorderswithintheremainderofthe12monthperiod.

5.EdwardsvSkywaysLtd1964

Innegotiationsoverthetermsformakingtheclaimantredundant,thedefendantsgavehimthechoiceeitherofwithdrawinghistotalcontributionsfromtheircontributorypensionfundorofreceivingapaid-uppension.Itwasagreedthatifhechosethefirstoption,thedefendantswouldmakeanexgratiapaymenttohim.Hechosethefirstoption;

hiscontributionswererefundedbuttheexgratiapaymentwasnotmade.Hesuedforbreachofcontract.

Althoughthedefendantsarguedthattheuseofthephraseexgratiashowednointentiontocreatelegalrelations,thiswasacommercialarrangementandtheburdenofrebuttingthepresumptionoflegalrelationhadnotbeendischargedbythedefendants.

6.Hillas&

CoLtdvArcosLtd1932

Theclaimantsagreedtopurchasefromthedefendants"

22,000standardsofsoftwoodgoodsoffairspecificationovereseason1930"

.Theagreementcontainedanoptiontobuyafurther100,000standardsin1931,withouttermsastothekindorsizeoftimberbeingspecified.The1930transactiontookplace,butthesellersrefusedtosupplyanywoodin1931,sayingthattheagreementwastoovague.

Themissingtermsoftheagreementcouldbeascertainedbyreferencetotheprevioustransactions.

7.RamsgateVictoriaCovMontfort1866

ThedefendantappliedtothecompanyinJuneforsharesandpaidadeposit.AttheendofNovemberthecompanysenthimanacceptancebyissueofallotmentandrequestedpaymentofthebalancedue.Thedefendantcontendedthathisofferhadexpiredandcouldnolongerbeaccepted.

Theofferwasvalidforareasonabletimeonlyandfivemonthswastoolong.

8.DickinsonvDodds1876

theacts:

thedefendant,on10June,wrotetotheclaimanttoofferpropertyforsaleat800,adding'

thisoffertobeleftopenuntilFriday12June,9.00am.'

on11Junethedefendantsoldthepropertytoanotherbuyer,A.B,whohadbeenanintermediarybetweenDickinsonandDodds,informedDickinsonthatthedefendanthadsoldtosomeoneelse.OnFriday12June,before9.00am,theclaimanthandedtothedefendanttoaformalletterofacceptance.

Thedefendantwasfreetorevokehisofferandhaddonesobysaletoathirdparty;

theclaimantcouldnotaccepttheofferafterhehadlearntfromareliableinformantoftherevocationofoffertohim.

however,thiscaseshouldbetreatedwithcautionanditmaybethatonlyanagentcanremoveanoffer.

9.FinancingsLtdvStimson1962

Thedefendantwishedtopurchaseacar,andon16Marchsignedahire-purchaseform.Theform,issuedbytheclaimants,statedthattheagreementwouldbebindingonlyuponsignaturebythem.On20Marchthedefendant,notsatisfiedwiththecar,returnedit.On24Marchthecarwasstolenfromthepremisesofthedealer,andwasrecoveredbadlydamaged.On25Marchtheclaimantssignedtheform.Theysuedthedefendantforbreachofcontract.

Thedefendantwasnotboundtotakethecar.Hissigningoftheagreementwasactuallyanoffertocontractwiththeclaimant.Therewasanimpliedconditioninthisofferthatthecarwouldbeinareasonablecondition.

10.RoseandfrankvCrompton1923

acommercialagreementbywhichthedefendantsappointedtheclaimanttobeitsdistributorintheUSAcontainedaclausedescribedas‘theHonorablePledgeClause’whichexpresslystatedthatthearrangementwas‘notsubjecttolegaljurisdiction’inethercounty.thedefendantsterminatedtheagreementwithoutgivingnoticeasrequired,andrefusedtodelivergoodsorderedbytheclaimantsalthoughtheyhadacceptedtheseorderswhenplaced.

Thegeneralagreementwasnotlegallybindingastherewasnoobligationtostandbyantclauseinit.Howevertheordersforgoodswereseparateandbindingcontracts.Theclaimfordamagesforbreachoftheagreementfailed,buttheclaimfordamagesfornon-deliveryofgoodsorderedsucceeded.

11.HarveyvFacey1893

Theclaimanttelegraphedtothedefendant.“WillyousellusBumperHallPen?

Telegraphlowestcashprice”.Thedefendanttelegraphedinreply"

LowestpriceforBumperHallPen,￡900"

.Theclaimanttelegraphedtoacceptwhatheregardedasanoffer;

thedefendantmadenofurtherreply.

Thedefendant’stelegramwasmerelyastatementofhisminimumpriceifasaleweretobeagreed.Itwasnotanofferwhichtheclaimantcouldaccept.

12.BiggvBoydGibbons1971

Inthecourseofcorrespondencethedefendantrejectedanofferof￡20,000bytheclaimantandadded"

foraquicksaleIwouldaccept￡26,000....ifyouarenotinterestedinthispricewouldyoupleaseletmknowimmediately"

.Theclaimantacceptedthispriceof￡26,000andthedefendantacknowledgedhisacceptance.

Inthiscontextthedefendantmustbetreatedasmakinganofferwhichtheclaimanthadaccepted.

13.PartridgevCrittenden1968

Mr.Partridgeplacedanadvertisementfor‘Bramblefinchcocks,bramblefinchhens,25seach’.TheRSPCAbroughtaprosecutionagainsthimforofferingforsaleabramblingincontraventionoftheProtectionofBirdsAct1954.ThejusticeconvictedPartridgeandheappealed.

Theconvictionwasquashed.AlthoughtherehadbeenasaleincontraventionoftheAct,theprosecutioncouldnotrelyontheoffenceof‘offeringforsale’,astheadvertisementonlyconstitutedaninvitationtotreat.

14.PharmaceuticalSocietyofGreatBritainvBootsCashChemists（Southern）1952

Thefact:

Certaindrugscouldonlybesoldunderthesupervisionofaregisteredpharmacist.TheclaimantclaimedthisrulehadbeenbrokenbyBootswhodisplaythesedrugsinaself-serviceshop.Bootscontendedthattherewasnosaleuntilacustomerbroughtthegoodstothecashdeskandofferedtobuythem.Aregisteredpharmacistwasstationedatthispoint.

ThecourtfoundforBootsandcommentedthatifitweretruethatacustomeracceptedanoffertosellbyremovinggoodsfromitself,hecouldnotthenchangehismindandputthembackasthiswouldconstitutebreachofcontract.

15.ByrnevVanTienhoven1880

thedefendantswereinCardiff:

theclaimantsinNewYork.Thesequenceofeventswasasfollows.

1OctoberLetterpostedinCardiff,offeringtosell1000boxesoftinplates.

8OctoberLetterofrevocationofofferpostedinCardiff.

11OctoberLetterofofferreceivedinNewYorkandtelegramofacceptancesent.

15OctoberLetterconfirmingacceptancepostedinNewYork.

20OctoberLetterofrevocationreceivedinNewYork.theoffereehadmeanwhileresoldthecontractgoods.

Decision：

Theletterrevocationcouldnottakeeffectuntilreceived（20October）;

itcouldnotrevokethecontractmadebythetelegramacceptanceoftheofferon11October.

PartIIquestions.

1.Stateandexplainthefactorsaffectingthevalidityofacontract.

a.Capa