LawTeacher logo
LawTeacher The law essay professionals
0115 966 7966 Today's Opening Times 10:00 - 20:00 (BST)

This essay has been submitted by a law student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.

Julie suing bestfoods ltd


In this case, Julie suing Bestfoods Ltd from breaching of contract because she felt there is a contract binding between her and Bestfoods Ltd as she has posted the offer letter, and also, enclosed a cheque of £ 1, 000 to Bestfoods Ltd as payment for the Russian Caviars which Julie consider as acceptance.

Statute And Case Laws

Sale Of Good Act [1979] Section 57

Offerors are allowed to recondition their minds and to withdraw offers before the acceptance accepted by offerees, at anytime. (Sale of Good Act, 1979).

Blackpool & Fylde Aero Club Vs. Blackpool Borough Council [1990, CA]

“Blackpool Borough Council (the Council) invited tenders for certain flights, to be submitted in an envelope provided by the Council by a stipulated date.  The Aero Club submitted by the due date, but an error by the Council recorded it has received late and the tender was not considered.  The Aero Club alleged breach of contract; they claimed the Council had promised to consider all tenders submitted by the due date.

Held: Because of the ‘considerable labour and expense' that may be involved in preparing a tender then, at least where invitations to tender are provided to selected parties with clear procedures (as in this case) then, if the invitee submits a conforming tender ‘he is entitled … to be sure that his tender will … be opened and considered'.  To this extent, the invitation to tender constituted an offer which was accepted when the Aero Club made a timely submission.” (Clarke, 2008)

Bigg Vs. Boyd Gibbons [1971, CA]

“In the course of negotiations the claimant wrote to the defendants: ‘For a quick sale I would accept £ 20, 000.' The defendant wrote back accepting and the claimant then sends another letter in reply thanking the defendant ‘for accepting my offer'.

Held: A binding offer was made in the claimant's first letter. Russell LJ said: ‘I cannot escape the view having read the letters that the parties would regard themselves at the end of the correspondence… as having struck a bargain for the sale and purchase of this property.” (Adams, 2008)

According to Sale of Good Act [1979] section 57 has clearly stated that offeror has right to recondition before acceptance accepted which means Bestfoods Ltd has right to recondition the offers by Julie before acceptance. Since, the catalogue posted by Bestfoods Ltd is just an inducement, as to induce Julie to make offers. Offers only accepted, if, Bestfoods Ltd accepted the offers she offered, or else, there will be no binding of contract between Julie and Bestfoods Ltd, which means Julie unable to enforce legal right against Bestfoods Ltd from contract breaching.

Secondly, the offer posted by Julie just in the stage of negotiation which not consider as binding contract, as in, Harvey vs. Facey [1893]. Also, Bestfoods Ltd never officially accepted Julie offer as the company unable to fulfil the qualify acceptance offered by Julie, which considered as not an acceptance. In addition, Julie case is unlike Blackpool & Fylde Aero Club vs. Blackpool Borough Council [1990, CA] although there is a similarity in term of inducing, but, in this case considered as unilateral offer because there is a promise made by offeror, if, summit before due date which is clearly stated terms, and making this offer as a legally binding offer.

Lastly, a valid acceptance must be confirm, and without hesitation, or otherwise, considered as invalid acceptance as in this case. According to Julie case, “Alan, explained that Bestfoods can only supplies two boxes of caviars”, which consider as disputation before acceptance occurred. However, this case is different from Bigg vs. Boyd Gibbons [1971] because there is an acceptance made by defendant which considers a valid contract.


My advice to Julie that she cannot create legal relations with Bestfoods Ltd because there is no valid contract has been made. Since, the catalogue posted to her is just an inducement; the offer is not consider a valid contract unless acceptance is made by Bestfoods. In this case, Julie cannot sue Bestfoods Ltd from breaching of contract since there is not acceptance has been made. Although, £1, 000 has enclosed but not amount into acceptance unless Bestfoods bank [IN] the cheque, or otherwise, this cheque just consider an offer, not an acceptance.

In addition, a valid contract must not have disputation during acceptance, or otherwise, it is consider as invalid contract.


Adams, A. (2008). Law for Business Students. London: Pearson: Longman.

Clarke, J. (2008). Blackpool & Flyde Aero Club vs. Blackpool Borough Council. Retrieved Nov 26, 2009, from Australian Contract Law:

Sale of Good Act. (1979). Sale of Goods Act 1979 (c. 54). Retrieved Nov 19, 2009, from Official of Public Sector Information:

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:

Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.

Request Removal

If you are the original writer of this essay and no longer wish to have the essay published on the Law Teacher website then please click on the link below to request removal:

More from Law Teacher

We Write Bespoke Law Essays!
Find Out More