They Need to Demonstrate Good Research and Presentational Skills, and Coursework

They Need to Demonstrate Good Research and Presendational Skills, and Advice them to Solve the Problem - Coursework Example then(prenominal) comes the postal analogy rule the acceptance of the affirm when the bidee posts the letter but can this apply to extravagant instantaneous communication like e-mail. Lastly, is the counter offer which kills the original offer terminates it. BODY 1) An invitation to treat is an distinction of a willingness to conduct business, it is invitation to make an offer or commence negotiations. Courts have considered whether or not a communication was an invitation to treat in a wide variety of circumstances. The Advertisement which Peter maculations is an invitation to treat further like Partridge v Crittenden (1968), the ad of a bilateral contract and Carlil v Carbolic Smoke clustering Company (1893), was decided that an advertisement was a unilateral offer. 2) In Partridge v Crittenden The appellant place an advertisement in the issue for 13 A pril 1967, of a periodical Cage and Aviary Birds with the words t i British ABCR Bramble finch cocks, Bramble finch hens, 25s each. It was put under the general heading Classified Advertisements. In no place was there any direct use of the words offer for sale. T, having seen the advertisement, written for a hen, which was sent to him and arrived on 2 May 1967, wearing a closed-ring. T was able to remove it without harm to the bird. The appellant was charged with unlawfully offering for sale a certain wild live bird, viz, a brambling, new(prenominal) than a close-ringed specimen bred in captivity, contrary to s 6(1) of, and Sch 4 to, the Protection of Birds Act, 1954. The justices were of opinion that the advertisement was an offer for sale, and that the brambling was not a close-ringed specimen bred in captivity because it was possible to put off the birds ring. On appeal against conviction. It was held, the advertisement in the present case constituted in law an invitation to t reat, not an offer for sale, and the offence which was charged against the appellant was not, therefore, established. While on the other hand 3) Carlil v Carbolic Smoke lummox Company was decided on the different basis. The defendants, the proprietors of a some medical preparation called The Carbolic Smoke Ball, issued an advertisement in which they promised to pay 100 to any person who contracted the influenza after having used integrity of their smoke balls, in a certain specified manner and for a specified time. The plaintiff, upon the faith of the advertisement, purchased one of the defendants smoke balls, and used it in the manner and for the specified time, but nevertheless contracted the influenza. It was held that the above facts do a contract by the defendants to pay the plaintiff 100. In the event which happened that such contract was incomplete a contract by way of wagering deep down 8 & 9 Vict. c. 109, nor a policy within 14 Geo. 3, c. 48, s. 2 and that the plaintif f was entitled to recover the sum promised. 4) The general rule is that acceptance is not effective until it is communicated to the Offeror. This is sometimes expressed by saying that the acceptance cannot be made through tranquility and the offeror cannot waive communication if that would be to the detriment of the offeree . 5) This can be shown in the case snarl house v Bindley (1862). The plaintiff (F) brought an action against the defendant auctioneer (B) for the conversion of a horse. In celestial latitude 1860, a conversation had taken place between F and his nephew (N) regarding to the buying of a horse