Dickinson v Dodds: Difference between revisions

From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
(Created page with "'''Facts''': Parties entered into an arrangement whereby Defendant said he agreed to sell his property to Plaintiff for a set sum. The offer would terminate on Friday at nine. Pl...")
 
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Infobox Case Brief
|court=Court of Appeal
|citation=2 Ch. D. 463 (1876)
|date=1876
|subject=Contracts
}}
'''Facts''': Parties entered into an arrangement whereby Defendant said he agreed to sell his property to Plaintiff for a set sum. The offer would terminate on Friday at nine. Plaintiff found out on Thursday that the defendant offered to sell to another. He quickly tried to notify Defendant of his acceptance of the offer, but other sale had been completed.
'''Facts''': Parties entered into an arrangement whereby Defendant said he agreed to sell his property to Plaintiff for a set sum. The offer would terminate on Friday at nine. Plaintiff found out on Thursday that the defendant offered to sell to another. He quickly tried to notify Defendant of his acceptance of the offer, but other sale had been completed.


Line 12: Line 18:


'''Comments''': When the offeree knew that the offeror was trying to sell the property to another person, that was a manifestation that the oferee's power of acceptance was ended.
'''Comments''': When the offeree knew that the offeror was trying to sell the property to another person, that was a manifestation that the oferee's power of acceptance was ended.
[[Category:Cases:Contracts]]

Revision as of 02:03, February 1, 2020

Dickinson v Dodds
Court Court of Appeal
Citation 2 Ch. D. 463 (1876)
Date decided 1876

Facts: Parties entered into an arrangement whereby Defendant said he agreed to sell his property to Plaintiff for a set sum. The offer would terminate on Friday at nine. Plaintiff found out on Thursday that the defendant offered to sell to another. He quickly tried to notify Defendant of his acceptance of the offer, but other sale had been completed.

Procedural History: Awarded specific performance of the contract, in favor of Plaintiff. Trial court ordered specific performance. Appealed.

Issue: Was the "offer" a contract?

Holding: No, there had been no meeting of the minds. There was no contract.

Reasons: The offer was just an offer, there was no consideration given, and was not binding on either party.

Judgment: Dismissed (reversed)

Comments: When the offeree knew that the offeror was trying to sell the property to another person, that was a manifestation that the oferee's power of acceptance was ended.