I will presently state what in my judgment it is. If it is admitted, is it not what every letter says? Grant in the Family Law Portal of the European Encyclopedia of Law. The company allotted the shares to the defendant, and duly addressed to him, posting a letter containing the notice of allotment. There's nothing wrong with supplying enough detail for the article to be useful to a law student, but it's important to make it accessible to the layman as well. Historical Dictionary of International Tribunals. An offer may be withdrawn at any time before it has been unconditionally accepted : and. But the reason I want some picture there is that it probably helps people to remember the case with a form of visual.
At the same time I am not prepared to admit that the implication in question will lead to any great or general inconvenience or hardship. You should contact a lawyer licensed in your jurisdiction for advice on specific legal problems. But such there must be at times in every view of the law. I ask why is it? If, therefore, posting a letter which does not reach is a sufficient communication of acceptance of an offer, it is equally a communication of everything else which may be communicated by post, e. See the Collecting Societies and Industrial Assurance Companies Act, 1896 ; Insurance.
Please just put up a better one. The question then is, is posting a letter which is never received a communication to the person addressed, or an equivalent, or something which dispenses with it? All the extraordinary and mischievous consequences which the Lord Justice points out in might happen if the law were otherwise when a letter is posted, would equally happen where it is sent otherwise than by the post. It probably will not, as so much has been said on the matter that principle is lost sight of. Why should he be the only person to suffer? They state that the offeror can always choose to make the acceptance binding only upon his through the mail as long as that is a medium of communication that the parties contemplated as at the time of mailing there is a meeting of the minds. Does the extent of the agency of the post office depend on the contents of the letter? Judgment for the majority held that there was a valid contract, because the rule for the post is that acceptance is effective even if the letter never arrives. The mischievous consequences he points out do not follow from that which I am contending for. Once someone posts acceptance, he argued, there is a meeting of minds, and by doing that decisive act a contract should come into effect.
But it need not be express nor within a definite time. My answer beforehand to any argument that may be urged is, that it is not a communication, and that there is no agreement to take it as an equivalent for or to dispense with a communication. Grant in the Commercial Law Portal of the European Encyclopedia of Law. It's about English contract law and how to determine when a contract has gone into effect. Household Fire and Carriage Accident Insurance Company Ltd v Grant 1879 On 30 September 1874 Grant applied by a letter for 100 shares this was his offer to buy the shares in the Household Fire and Carriage Accident Insurance Company Ltd.
I am at a loss to see how the post office is the agent for both parties. The question was whether Mr Grant's offer for shares had been validly accepted and as such whether he was legally bound to pay. He noted that anyone can opt out of the rule, and that even if it sometimes causes hardship, it would cause even more hardship to not have the rule. Chapters: Household Fire Insurance Company V Grant, Tamplin V James, 1879 in Ireland, Wormwood Scrubs Act 1879 Source: Wikipedia Pages: 31 Mr Grant applied for shares in the Household Fire and Carriage Accident Insurance Company. But as it stands it comes to this, that if an offer is to be accepted in June, and there is a month's post between the places, posting the letter on the 30th of June will suffice, though it does not reach till the 31st of July; but that case does not affect this. The liquidator was thus successful at recovering the money, which Grant appealed. His main function is to supervise the servants and the arrangements of the Royal Household Browse You might be interested in these references.
The question in this case is different. Ratio A contract becomes binding the instant that the acceptance is put in the mail, so long as the parties have contemplated the mail as a viable means of communication in their dealings the postal rule. Property sunk in a steamboat and unclaimed for twenty years was held to be abandoned. The company allotted the shares to the defendant, and duly addressed to him, posting a letter containing the notice of allotment. What is he to do but to act on the negative, that no communication has been made to him? The Masters of Trinity House are known. It was said, if he sends it by hand it is revocable, but not if he sends it by post, which makes the difference. Grant in the Civil Law Portal of the European Encyclopedia of Law.
If he trusts to the post he trusts to a means of communication which, as a rule, does not fail, and if no answer to his offer is received by him, and the matter is of importance to him, he can make inquiries of the person to whom his offer was addressed. What is the agency as to the sender? That is because I have a full-time job which does not involve the law, and Wikipedia is a hobby for me: i. You may skip to the end and expand the entry. I don't care to make the time for it. I can only urge you to do so and hope that you or another legal-minded Wikipedian will come to agree.
Interested to find out what entries have been added? Grant in the Australian Legal Encyclopedia. There is indeed a case recently reported in the Times , before the Master of the Rolls, where the offer was to be accepted within fourteen days, and it is said to have been held that it was enough to post the letter on the 14th, though it would and did not reach the offerer till the 15th. Grant in other legal encyclopedias If you search for an entry, then decide you want to see what another legal encyclopedia says about it, you may find your entry in this section. I am of opinion that there was no bargain between these parties to allot and take shares, that to make such bargain there should have been an acceptance of the defendant's offer and a communication to him of that acceptance. That there was no such communication. Wikipedia is targeted at a general audience. It is impossible in transactions which pass between parties at a distance, and have to be carried on through the medium of correspondence, to adjust conflicting rights between innocent parties, so as to make the consequences of mistake on the part of a mutual agent fall equally upon the shoulders of both.
Once a mortgage, always a mortgage. Grant in the Family Law Portal of the European Encyclopedia of Law. But if he wishes to claim for a total loss, he. Grant in the International Legal Encyclopedia. A conveyance is a deed of grant. Indeed, Wikipedia policy specifically directs against when writing an article. Besides, his offer may be by advertisement to all mankind.
There is no doubt that it is so in all cases where personal service is not required. This page needs to be. His application was accepted, and his name was added to the list of registered shareholders, However, the letter informing the appellant of this never reached him and thus Grant never paid for the shares. He refused to pay on the grounds that he was not a shareholder — he had never received the notification in the mail and was not aware. It is for those who say it is to make good their contention. He says the proposer may guard himself against hardship by making the proposal expressly conditioned on the arrival of the answer within a definite time.