Med. Now there have been some recent What Is Important Is to see how the webs. is Pro60 0, r, on their for example, situations whore retailers have made Wars with their ofouorteopy oftemo .00,atfeiavivon sets for stores which is sort of a department store in England Ina um for cioo copier than 0, retail value (3.00 on its webs., Also Kodak company advertise the cam computer equipment „0. 0,32 of (329 And Amason as well. One of the biggest retailers, advert e to do_ f instood of On What then is the consumer who thinks he’s getting bargain ? the problem in some of these cases Is that sometimes there is an automatic relahl to the cOo,orner advising him that is order has been received, however. The overwhelming argument seems to suggest that these types of communication, meaning Internet shopping sites, are no more than an Invitation to treat Based on the boots and tho Fisher cases, and even If by some stretch of the Imagination It amounted to an offer, then the principle of mistake, which will of course explore In a later lecture, would possibly apply here, and the support for that. Iles In the 1939 case of Hartog and Wenn. Shollds, where It was held that no contract arises where one party makes an offer to another party, and he Is aware that the other party is acting under a fundamental mistake as to the terms of tho offer. II means, therefore if, in the Argos case we see a (300 television being advertised rim. It Is clear, or appears to be clear, that there is a mistake on Argos’s part and so It may mean that mistake may be used to vitiate such a contract
Now there have been some European directives regulating various aspects of the law relating to electronic contracting, but none seem to go so far as defining the status of a website as either an invitation to treat or an offer. At best what we have Is Regulation 12 of the electronic commerce EC Directive Regulations 2002 saying that an order maybe but need not be a contractual offer that seems to imply that websites would normally constitute Invitations to treat.
Let’s examine what happens once an offer is established. Well, it must have been communicated to the offeree, as there can be no acceptance without knowledge of the offer. And the supporting case for that Is that (I1 v Clark, Gives you the basis for that proposition. Finally, how does the offer comes to an end, We, after this lecture we will conclude this lecture on offer by reviewing how it comes to an end and what happens when an offer then moves on to acceptance We will be considering how an offer comes to an end Now, an offer can be terminated by revocation. It can be terminated by lapse in time. BY helot{ rejected all where a cond.’, Precedent has not been satisfied, or indeed where the offeror dies, but only of course In a personal service contract Lastly of course, on offer will come to an end If it is accepted by the offeree. Which means it has now matured into an agreement. If we start by looking at revocation, an offer may be revoked at anytime, before acceptance has occured Now the authority for that. Is of course the case of Payne and Cave, which I mentioned earlier on the auction. And the case of Scamiand and Dkker in 2001 further adds that the offeror may withdraw hrs olfer even if it was express, stated that it would remain open for a fixed period. The reason, of course, is that a promise to leave an offer open Is not generally supported by any consideration given by the offeree. we will consider consideration. Actually, tn a later lecture and we will see this principle in its fullest form The authority for the principle that in keeping an offer open, It needs to be supported by the consideration is the 1828 case of Routiedge and Grant. Now in Grant, the defendant offered to take a ‘ease of the plaintiffs premises and gave the plaintiff six weeks to make up his mind. Novi, three weeks later, the defendant withdrew offer and afterwards the plaintiff purported to accept within the 6 week period He obviously got a better offer, it appears. The COUrt Said that there was no