![]() There is some case also where the postal rule did not apply. But if any offer is done by face-to-face conversation and the acceptance is posted at that time, then it will not be applicable. If the conditions of a postal rule are not fully fulfilled then the postal rule is not applicable. In this case, the letter was correctly stamped and addressed. In the case of Re London & Norther Bank 2 Evidence of proper posting can be seen in this case. There is a case relating to this rule, "Adams v Lindsell" The proper postal rule methods must be used. ![]() This rule is only applicable for those contracts which have been offered are made through letters. But this rule is not applicable for all situations rather in some specified cases. The acceptance is done before it's reaching to the offeror and it will also be considered as a valid one. It means when the offer is given, it does not accept immediately rather it is posted. There is an exception of acceptance which is known as the 'postal rule'. This rule is made for given protection to the offeror as he can know that his offer has been accepted. The communication of acceptance is very important for every contract because acceptance is considered effective when it is actually and properly communicated to the offeror or any agent who is authorized by him. The court held that there was no contract between them because the nephew did not give any answer. There is a case regarding this, "Felthouse v Bindley" 1, a letter was given to a nephew by his uncle offering to buy a horse and if his nephew did not answer within two weeks then the offer would be terminated. Silence is not counted as acceptance according to the law. Any agent of the offeree can accept the offer. But on behalf of the offeree, any person who is authorized can accept the offer. The offer which is made by the offeror is only accepted by that person toward whom the offeror made the contract. If an offer is accepted by any condition, then it will be considered null. The acceptance must be communicated and there are so many rules regarding this. According to the law, the acceptance is considered valid when the contract is made expressly. ![]() Bur without reaching the contract to the offeror, it will not be counted as effective. Acceptance can be done by expressing in words (oral) or by written or by conducts. For this, there is needed consideration like money or other valuable things, etc. Acceptance is done by the offeree after agreeing on the terms which are made by the offeror in the contract. If the offeree accepts the offer made by the offeror, then it will be considered as a contract according to law. An offer is given first to anyone and wished for accepting the offer which is given by the offeror. A contract cannot be done without actual communication to the offeror. 1 I do not agree with the statement because according to section 7(a) of the Contract Act, 1872 acceptance must be absolute and qualified and in the case of a postal rule when the acceptance is posted, it will be considered as effective. She said that "There has to be a comprehensive assessment of each applicant's character, as an individual, which involves an exercise of judgment, not just ticking boxes on a form,"įurthermore, she also addedd that "Plainly, criminal convictions are relevant to the assessment of character, but they are likely to vary greatly in significance, depending upon the nature of the offence and the length of time which has elapsed since its commission, as well as any pattern of repeat offending."įinally she added that: "The defendant is entitled to adopt a policy on the way in which criminal convictions will normally be considered by her caseworkers, but it should not be applied mechanistically and inflexibly.Answer to the Question No. No references were sought from his employer, or his personal referees, and there was no interview with the claimant." at no point does the 17 page judgement make any reference to the fact that judgement was given due to his prior service with the British ArmyĬlearly, according to the judge “This was not an adequate assessment of the claimant's character, as required by law. most importantly the fact that the case states that the Home Office should have considered references from his "Employer". I think there are several aspects of the case that you are missing.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |