42:
181:
could go on indefinitely. Instead it must be considered that the offerors were making the offer to the plaintiffs during every moment that the letter was in the post. Then when the
Offeree has placed his acceptance in the post there is a meeting of minds, which concludes the offer and gives effect to the acceptance.
165:
offering to sell them certain fleeces of wool and requiring an answer in the course of post. The defendants misdirected the letter so that the plaintiffs did not receive it until 5 September. The plaintiffs posted their acceptance on the same day but it was not received until 9 September. Meanwhile,
180:
said that if that was true it would be impossible to complete any contract through the post; if the defendants were not bound by their offer until the answer was received, then the plaintiffs would not be bound until they had received word that the defendants had received their acceptance, and this
184:
The acceptance did not arrive in course of post strictly speaking (all parties understood in course of post to refer to 7 September). But because the delay was the fault of the defendant it was taken that the acceptance did arrive in course of post.
303:
169:
The defendants argued that there could not be a binding contract until the answer was actually received, and until then they were free to sell the wool to another buyer.
205:
203:
2 Ch 27 that the court determined the precise timing of the acceptance, that is the moment the letter of acceptance is posted. (See also
293:
177:
93:
52:
166:
on 8 September, the defendants, not having received an answer by 7 September as they had expected, sold the wool to someone else.
288:
298:
218:
145:; however, it was found that where a letter of acceptance is posted, an offer is accepted "in course of post".
223:
138:
199:
41:
126:
282:
194:
134:
17:
193:
This case is the first step towards establishing the postal acceptance rule (
162:
158:
133:
contract case regarded as the first case towards the establishment of the "
141:. Ordinarily, any form of acceptance must be communicated expressly to an
142:
130:
154:
27:
1818 English contract law case which introduced the postal rule
270:
Beale, Hugh; Arthur
Hartkamp; Hein Kotz; Denis Tallon (2002).
109:
99:
89:
84:
76:
68:
58:
48:
34:
80:EWHC KB J59; (1818) 1 B & Ald 681; 106 ER 250
153:The case involved two parties in the sale of
8:
272:Cases, Materials and Texts on Contract Law
40:
31:
206:Entores Ltd v Miles Far East Corporation
243:
241:
239:
235:
304:Court of King's Bench (England) cases
63:Adams & Ors v Lindsell & Ors
7:
25:
115:Offer and acceptance, postal rule
1:
197:). It was not until 1892 in
320:
294:English agreement case law
114:
104:
39:
219:Agreement in English law
127:(1818) 1 B & Ald 681
157:. On 2 September, the
139:acceptance of an offer
224:Offer and acceptance
289:1818 in British law
274:. Hart Publishing.
256:Beale (2002) p.222
247:Beale (2002) p.221
200:Henthorn v Fraser
119:
118:
18:Adams v. Lindsell
16:(Redirected from
311:
299:1818 in case law
275:
257:
254:
248:
245:
123:Adams v Lindsell
85:Court membership
44:
35:Adams v Lindsell
32:
21:
319:
318:
314:
313:
312:
310:
309:
308:
279:
278:
269:
266:
261:
260:
255:
251:
246:
237:
232:
215:
191:
175:
151:
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
317:
315:
307:
306:
301:
296:
291:
281:
280:
277:
276:
265:
262:
259:
258:
249:
234:
233:
231:
228:
227:
226:
221:
214:
211:
190:
187:
174:
171:
150:
147:
117:
116:
112:
111:
107:
106:
102:
101:
97:
96:
91:
87:
86:
82:
81:
78:
74:
73:
70:
66:
65:
60:
59:Full case name
56:
55:
50:
46:
45:
37:
36:
26:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
316:
305:
302:
300:
297:
295:
292:
290:
287:
286:
284:
273:
268:
267:
263:
253:
250:
244:
242:
240:
236:
229:
225:
222:
220:
217:
216:
212:
210:
208:
207:
202:
201:
196:
188:
186:
182:
179:
172:
170:
167:
164:
161:wrote to the
160:
156:
148:
146:
144:
140:
136:
132:
128:
125:
124:
113:
108:
103:
100:Case opinions
98:
95:
92:
90:Judge sitting
88:
83:
79:
75:
71:
67:
64:
61:
57:
54:
51:
47:
43:
38:
33:
30:
19:
271:
252:
204:
198:
195:mailbox rule
192:
189:Significance
183:
176:
168:
152:
122:
121:
120:
62:
53:King's Bench
29:
209:2 QB 327).
135:postal rule
72:5 June 1818
283:Categories
264:References
163:plaintiffs
159:defendants
213:See also
173:Judgment
129:, is an
110:Keywords
77:Citation
143:offeror
131:English
69:Decided
137:" for
230:Notes
178:Law J
149:Facts
105:Law J
94:Law J
49:Court
155:wool
285::
238:^
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
