HomeAccessibilityIndependent approachTurnaround timeCommunication skillsFee structures
solicitors -  commercial legal work

Arbitration
Assets/shares buy/sell
Commercial advice
Company law
Company start ups
Competition law
Confidentiality
Construction & building
Contract advice
Conveyancing
Copyright
Debt recovery
Design rights
Directors duties
Discrimination
Dismissal law
E-commerce
Employment
European law
Franchising
Infringement
Insurance
Intellectual property
Joint ventures
Libel
Licensing (premises)
Litigation (commercial)
Merchandising
Music & entertainment
Negligence (general)
Partnerships
Passing-off
Patents
Planning
Professional negligence
Redundacy
Reinsurance
Shareholders
Software
Sponsorship
Sports contracts
Trade Marks (Trademarks)
Unfair dismissal

Offer and acceptance - consideration - estate agent sending unsolicited letter - liability for fee on sale L, an estate agent, sent an unsolicited letter, informing F of a property offered for sale by another estate agent who had been retained by the vendor. The letter stated that a fee would be payable to L if the information led to a purchase by F. F believed that L was the vendor's agent and asked its own agent to make arrangements to view the property, following which F made an offer and subsequently purchased the property. L claimed the fee set out in the letter, contending that the letter constituted an offer to provide further information in return for a fee payable on completion. L's claim was refused at first instance and L appealed. Held, dismissing the appeal, that the information given in the letter did not entitle L to claim a fee as there was no agreement in existence between L and F at the time the letter was sent. To find otherwise would allow L to impose a contract on F, contrary to the principle of willing assent by contracting parties, Falcke v. Scottish Imperial Insurance Co (1887) L.R. 34 Ch. D. 234 followed. Although a contract could have been made after L had provided F with the initial information, that information only amounted to past consideration which could not support the contract contended for by L. Further information given by L at F's request would have been valid consideration, but this had not been sought by F. On the facts, therefore, L's letter did not constitute an offer to provide further information in return for a fee, so that no contract had been made and no fee was payable to L by F. LADY MANOR LTD v. FAT CAT CAFÉ BARS (NO. 2) [2001] 33 E.G.88, Judge Cowell, CC (West London). "Current Law" January 2002
E-mail us with details of your enquiry on contract-advice@humphreys.co.uk
Include your telephone number,
fax number and address.

Tel (0117) (international +44 117) 929 2662 
Fax (0117) (international +44 117) 929 2722




Relevant material




INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY - CONTRACT
 
Mistake - Mistake of fact - Scope of doctrine of equitable rescission
 
ESTOPPEL
 
Offer and acceptance - consideration
 
Contract - estoppel - media and entertainment
 
Court will not import term to protect employer’s business
 


Humphreys & Co., solicitors Bristol



Click here for information about the work we do for private clients.

© Copyright Humphreys & Co., solicitors

Home Page