- Published on
Harvey and Another v Facey and Others (1893) PC
On the same day, three telegrams were exchanged between the parties. Initially, the appellants sent the respondents a telegram asking, "Will you sell us Bumper Hall Pen?" "Telegraph lowest cash price." The respondents said that the Bumper Hall Pen was the lowest priced at £900. The appellants subsequently sent a telegram saying, "We agree to purchase Bumper Hall Pen for the £900 that you have requested." Send us the title deed so we can take control of the property as soon as possible. Due to the respondents' failure to finalize the sale, the appellants requested a particular performance order.
held that no contract existed. According to Lord Morris, the initial telegraph poses two queries.Only the second question was addressed by the replies, who provided his lowest price. The appellants' reply telegram should not be interpreted as an acceptance of their offer to sell them; rather, it is an offer that [the respondents] must accept.
On the same day, three telegrams were exchanged between the parties. Initially, the appellants sent the respondents a telegram asking, "Will you sell us Bumper Hall Pen?" "Telegraph lowest cash price." The respondents said that the Bumper Hall Pen was the lowest priced at £900. The appellants subsequently sent a telegram saying, "We agree to purchase Bumper Hall Pen for the £900 that you have requested." Send us the title deed so we can take control of the property as soon as possible. Due to the respondents' failure to finalize the sale, the appellants requested a particular performance order.
held that no contract existed. According to Lord Morris, the initial telegraph poses two queries.Only the second question was addressed by the replies, who provided his lowest price. The appellants' reply telegram should not be interpreted as an acceptance of their offer to sell them; rather, it is an offer that [the respondents] must accept.
0 Comments