Lecture 7 Instantaneous Communication Contract Law Why is this important? · In today's world, contracts can be made through these means of communication. . Instantaneous communication could be argued to differ from using the post, for which the postal rule is applicable. · In relation to acceptance made using instantaneous communication, it is crucial to determine when and where the acceptance becomes effective. Entores v Miles Far East Corp. [1955] 2 QB 327 . Starting point of the law in this area. · Dealt with communication by telex. o Telex is connected to the phoneline and communications are connected to the phoneline and thus can transcribe communications . The issue was where the acceptance took place. . Lord Denning- held acceptance by telex took place where it was received, and not where it was sent. o Opposite to the postal rule. . An extension of the postal rule was rejected. Analysis · Are all instantaneous communication similar? o Not all communication have different levels of instantaneousness, e.g. email and a fax · Should the same rules apply to all? o Same rule for all communication? Postal rule v Telex rule? · Are fax and emails not analogous to post? They can sit unread for some time after delivery. · Issues become more pertinent when the question is when (ie time) the communication of acceptance is deemed effective. · Lord Denning- analogy of aeroplane distorting a contract conversation across a river. · For a fax, if there are problems in delivery, it should be noticed and communicated. . However, for emails, there may be no indication of problems in delivery on the part of the recipient. · How about when communication is sent out of office hours? Or when recipient is unavailable to notice?
Lecture 7 Contract Law . Was the decision in Entores based more upon what was reasonable to expect in a business context, than on a proper evaluation of the similarity/dissimilarity between modes of instantaneous communication and the post? . Some of these decisions can only be made based on practicality- Apple Corps Ltd v Apple Computer Inc [2004] EWHC 768. . Conductive Inkjet Technology Ltd v Uni-Pixel Displays Inc [2013] EWHC 2968 · A contract resulting from complex negotiations can be held to be formed in two places at the same time. . Note that Entores dealt with the place where contract was made and not the time. · The case provides no direct authority as regards the time when a telex acceptance is effective. · The postal rule is not applicable, because the Entores principle requires the acceptance to have arrived at the offeror's address for it to be effective. The Possibilities · Should acceptance be effective when actually read by offeror? o No because its not conclusive and perhaps is hard to evidence · Should acceptance be effective when read by offeror's agent, e.g an employee? o See point above. · Should acceptance be effective when it is received in the machine, and not yet