 |
Wiki Law School will soon be moving! Please update your bookmarks. Our future address is www.wikilawschool.org |
Dickinson v Dodds: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
2. Can such an offer be revoked without an express statement? | 2. Can such an offer be revoked without an express statement? | ||
|holding=Lord Justice James: A promise to hold an offer open is not enforceable without [[Contracts/Consideration|consideration]], & it can be implied revoked by the offeror's conduct. | |holding=Lord Justice James: A promise to hold an offer open is not enforceable without [[Contracts/Consideration|consideration]], & it can be implied revoked by the offeror's conduct. | ||
|judgment=Judgment reversed; complaint from Dickinson dismissed. | |||
|reasons=Lord Justice James: The timeframe to sell was part of the general offer, & therefore, not binding unless validly accepted. | |reasons=Lord Justice James: The timeframe to sell was part of the general offer, & therefore, not binding unless validly accepted. | ||
Revision as of 16:31, September 13, 2023
| Dickinson v Dodds | |
| Court | Court of Chancery |
|---|---|
| Citation | 2 Ch. D. 463 (1876) |
| Date decided | 1876 |
| Appealed from | Property |
Facts
This case was litigated in England.
Case in 1 sentence: the early bird catch the worm
On Wednesday, June 10th 1874, John Dodds ("Dodds") offered in writing to sell a residential estate to George Dickinson ("Dickinson"). The written offer would remain open until 9 am, Friday.
Procedural History
- Dickinson = plaintiff = buyer1
- Allen = buyer2 = defendant
- Dodds = defendant = property seller
Dickinson sued Dodds & Allen.
Issues
1. Can an offerree (Dickinson) enforce an offeror's (Dodds) promise to hold an offer open for a definite time?
2. Can such an offer be revoked without an express statement?Holding
Lord Justice James: A promise to hold an offer open is not enforceable without consideration, & it can be implied revoked by the offeror's conduct.
Judgment
Judgment reversed; complaint from Dickinson dismissed.
Reasons
Lord Justice James: The timeframe to sell was part of the general offer, & therefore, not binding unless validly accepted.
Dickinson hadn't offered Dodds anything to hold the offer open. In other words, Dickinson had not given any consideration (anything of value).Rule
"A meeting of the minds": A moment in time, preceding the contract, during which the 2 parties' minds are in agreement.
In this case, a meeting of the minds of Dickinson & Dodds didn't occur before the sale of the property from Dodds to Allen.Comments
Lord Justice James: Dodds (seller who gave a timeframe to sell his property) wasn't required to formally notify Dickinson that the offer was withdrawn before the 9 am, Friday deadline.
