Joanna Page jmp239@cam.ac.uk Contract Law Supervision 1: Formation (Part 1): Offer and acceptance TEXTBOOKS: 2: Either: - O'Sullivan & Hilliard, Law of Contract (9th edn 2020), chapters 1 & - McKendrick, Contract Law (14th edn, 2019), chapters 1-3; - Andrews, Contract Law (2nd edn, 2015), chapters 1-3. 1. Formation of Bilateral Contracts Morgan 'Great Debates In Contract Law' (3rd Ed 2020), Chapter 1 Nolan 'Offer and Acceptance in the Electronic Age' in Burrows & Peel (eds), Contract Formation and Parties (OUP 2010) 1.1 Offer and Acceptance Hyde v Wrench (1840) 3 Beavan 334; 49 ER 13 The Defendant offered to sell it for £1000, and if that had been at once unconditionally accepted, there would undoubtedly have been a perfect binding contract; instead of that, the Plaintiff made an offer of his own, to purchase the property for £950, and he thereby rejected the offer previously made by the Defendant. I think that it was not afterwards competent for him to revive the proposal of the Defendant, by tendering an acceptance of it; and that, therefore, there exists no obligation of any sort between the parties. Gibson v Manchester CC [1979] 1 WLR 294, HL The paragraph states thatthere is no formal offer of mortgage and to apply to buy to fill out the application form. This is clearly not a contractual offer to buy but an entry into negotiations. Following this, the lack of price in the application and later negotiations about the path are concluded before an offer for purchasing the house is put forward by the Plaintiff. The Council never accepted the offer and wrote that they could not due to the policy change under Labour. Barry v Davies [2000] 1 WLR 1962 As a matter of law he held that there was a collateral contract between the auctioneer and the highest bidder constituted by an offer by the auctioneer to sell to the highest bidder which was accepted when the bid was made. There is consideration both in the form of detriment to the bidder, since his bid can be accepted unless and until it is withdrawn, and benefit to the auctioneer as the bidding is driven up. Moreover attendance at the sale is likely to be increased if it is known that there is no reserve. As to the agency point, there is no doubt that when the sale is concluded, the contract is between the purchaser and vendor and not the auctioneer. Even if the identity of the vendor is not disclosed, it is clear that the auctioneer is selling as agent. It is true that there was no such contract between vendor and purchaser. But that does not prevent a collateral agreement existing between the auctioneer and bidder. Where a seller wrongfully refuses to deliver goods to the buyer, the measure of damages where there is a market in the goods is prima facie to be ascertained by the difference between the contract price and the market or current price of the goods