- Published on
Rooke v Dawson (1895) Ch.
The accused oversaw a scholarship fund as trustees. The trust agreement called for a prize to be given to a Mill Hill School graduate who attended University College London or New College London and performed very well on a test administered by the trustees. The plaintiff and one other candidate took the examination, which the defendants promoted and administered. Despite having the best grades, the plaintiff was not given the scholarship by the defendants.
According to Chitty J., the advertisement was "nothing more than a declaration that an examination for a scholarship will be held, and there is no announcement that the scholar who obtains the highest number of marks will receive the scholarship." According to Spencer v. Harding (above), there was no contract between the parties to this case since the court declined to import the conditions of the trust deed into the advertisement.
The accused oversaw a scholarship fund as trustees. The trust agreement called for a prize to be given to a Mill Hill School graduate who attended University College London or New College London and performed very well on a test administered by the trustees. The plaintiff and one other candidate took the examination, which the defendants promoted and administered. Despite having the best grades, the plaintiff was not given the scholarship by the defendants.
According to Chitty J., the advertisement was "nothing more than a declaration that an examination for a scholarship will be held, and there is no announcement that the scholar who obtains the highest number of marks will receive the scholarship." According to Spencer v. Harding (above), there was no contract between the parties to this case since the court declined to import the conditions of the trust deed into the advertisement.
0 Comments