- Published on
"Gibson v. Manchester City Council HL (1979) "
In a letter to the plaintiff, the defendant stated the following:
"The corporation may be prepared to sell the house to you at the purchase price of…£2,180… If you would like to make a formal application to buy your council house, please complete the enclosed application form and return it to me as soon as possible.
The defendant denied down the plaintiff's request for a reduced fee in a letter that she included with the form. The plaintiff then requested that the defendant "continue with the purchase as per my application." The Labour Party had taken over the defendant council in the meanwhile, and the defendant was now refusing to sell the plaintiff the house.
Held that the defendant was not required to sell to the plaintiff because they had not made an offer. By examining the "correspondence as a whole," Lord Denning MR of the Court of Appeal determined that the parties had a contract in place for the sale of the residence. However, Lord Diplock stated in the House of Lords:
"I can see no reason in the instant case for departing from the conventional approach of looking at the…documents…and seeing whether on their true construction there is to be found in them a contractual offer by the council to sell the house to Mr Gibson and an acceptance of that offer by Mr Gibson."
The House of Lords determined that there could not be a contract since the defendant council had not made a contractual offer to the plaintiff using the "conventional approach."
In a letter to the plaintiff, the defendant stated the following:
"The corporation may be prepared to sell the house to you at the purchase price of…£2,180… If you would like to make a formal application to buy your council house, please complete the enclosed application form and return it to me as soon as possible.
The defendant denied down the plaintiff's request for a reduced fee in a letter that she included with the form. The plaintiff then requested that the defendant "continue with the purchase as per my application." The Labour Party had taken over the defendant council in the meanwhile, and the defendant was now refusing to sell the plaintiff the house.
Held that the defendant was not required to sell to the plaintiff because they had not made an offer. By examining the "correspondence as a whole," Lord Denning MR of the Court of Appeal determined that the parties had a contract in place for the sale of the residence. However, Lord Diplock stated in the House of Lords:
"I can see no reason in the instant case for departing from the conventional approach of looking at the…documents…and seeing whether on their true construction there is to be found in them a contractual offer by the council to sell the house to Mr Gibson and an acceptance of that offer by Mr Gibson."
The House of Lords determined that there could not be a contract since the defendant council had not made a contractual offer to the plaintiff using the "conventional approach."
0 Comments