and this lecture we shall discuss the difference forms of invitation to treat the different forms of invitation to treat now the reason this topic is important is because in our previous lecture we sought to draw the distinction between and offer and an invitation to sweets and enjoying that extension we mentioned that when a person makes an invitation to treat it does not qualify as an offer and the person to whom the invitation to treat is made is the one who then makes the offer so you remember that in our previous lecture we mentioned that for a statement to amount to an offer then that statement must have that finality attached to it that statement must be a statement or a communication that has that finality it leaves nothing further for negotiation so that the moment the party to whom it is made communicates its acceptance then there will be deemed to be a valid contract but you mentioned that as for invitation to treat it is rather a communication which is not an offer it is rather a communication that invites the party to whom it is made to make the offer and so in this lecture we will look at examples like display of goods in the shop what another topic what we will explain is that if you enter a shop and you see Goods that have been advertised with a price list attached such an advertisement would amount to an invitation to treats and not an offer what it means is that if anybody enters the shop and decides to see and then and then see as soon worth 500 Ghana cities and that person decides to go to the counter and pay the 500 Ghana cedis it is the person who's get telling the seller that he wants to buy the shoes for 500 Ghana cedis he is the one that is what I'm making the offer with the seller may or may not accept in other words the mere fact that you have seen a particular suit displayed with a Priceless attached doesn't mean that so long as you take the money to the seller the seller is going to sell it to you because remember the display of the suits in the shop with the Fire Sticks attached is an invitation to treat it is inviting the bias to rather make the offer with the seller may or may not accept and over there to go and look at advertisements that when a particular person advertises good for sale the advertisement amount to an invitation to treat and not an offer in that it is inviting the person to whom the advertisement is made to rather make the offer with the seller may or may not accept we would also look at auction sales which means that when you attend an auction all the people who attend the auction and make the base they are the people making the office with the auctioneer may or may not accept another distinction is important because it will help you know where you come as a buyer to know when indeed a valid contact will be deemed to have informed and so to set the ball rolling are once again referred to the authoritative explanation of invitation to treat according to the London office of chitty on contracts where invitation to Children explained in the following ways and I quote on contract 28th Edition 1999 volume 1 and pay 93 this is how cheating on contracts explained an invitation to treats and I quote a communication by which a party is invited to make an offer is called an invitation to treat it is distinguishable from an offer primarily on the ground that it is not made with the intention that it is to become binding as soon as the person to whom it is addressed simply communicates his accent to its things and of course I'll take the quote once again and communication by which a party is invited to make an offer it's commonly called an invitation to treat it is distinguishable from an offer primarily on the ground that it is not made with the intention but it is to become binding as soon as the person to whom it is addressed simply communicates his accent to extends end of course so when you're saying that for example the advertisement of goods it is not met with the intention that it is to become binding as soon as the person to whom the advertisement is made communicates his acceptance a display of goods in a shop the display is not made with the intention if you become binding as soon as the person to whom it is addressed simply communicates his assets so for an invitation to treat it is the one that rather inviting the other person to make the offer and the person who is making the advertisement may or may not accept the offer and so the different kinds of invitation to treat we shall look at in this lecture a display of goose in a shop action sales tenders advertisement of goods or services in a newspaper circulation of catalogs or Price lists so we shall begin with the first display of rules in the shop and over here we refer to the authoritative case of pressure and Bell pizza and Bill this case is so important that you cannot be a good student of law of contracts and say you're not aware of the case of facial and Bill Professor f-i-s-h-e-r versus Bell b-e-l-l reported in 1961 one Queens bench at page 394. now the facts and holding I shall read on from this case are not taken from the actual reports that are taken from the authoritative Facebook on contractor 13 Edition so these are the brief facts of Fisher and Bill taken from geopol's case book on contract law and I quotes a shopkeeper displayed a flick knife in his shop window with a ticket stating injector knife and the price attached he was charged with offering the knife for sale contrary to section one one of the Restriction of weapons Act 1959. now let me explain the facts before I move on there is a Lord that says that nobody is supposed to offer pursue a particular knife nobody is supposed to offer this part of my mind for sale and then now a shopkeeper has been found displaying this particular flick knife in the shop window with a price attached for example the government of Ghana decide to ban the sale of tomato they see one person shop where the Tramadol has been displayed with the price attached similar facts as what we have over here a shopkeeper has a state a flick knife in a shop window where they're taking stating a Decker knife and a price attached now he has been charged with offering the knife for sale contrite section one one thousands in one of the Restriction of weapons at 1959 so the question will be what are the display of the flake knife in the shop whether it's a mouse to an offer or an invitation to treat if the phone finds that the display of the flick knife amounts one offer then it means that the shopkeeper is going to be allowable for having reason alone but if it is found that the display of the flick knife in the past attached amongst you and invitation to treat then it means the shopkeeper has not flouted any law because it is a buyer who rather make the offer assets so once again the fact that we are friends in the case of visa and Bell reported in 1961 one Queens bench and p394. the fact that a short keeper a flick knife in a soft window with a taken stating a doctor knife and then a price attached he was charged with offering the night for sale contrary to section one factorial one of the Restriction of offensive weapons after 1959 what is the password it was held that a display of goods in a shop window where the price ticket attached was merely an invitation to treat and not an offer so that no offense had been committed so that no offense had been committed so had been found in this case of Fisher and Bill but when a person displays Google for sure with the Priceless attack in a shop window the display of boost in the shop does not amount to a contraction offer but a rather amongst you and invitation to treat if you forget any case in contract law fisa and Bill you cannot afford to forget it with another case that also makes it very clear as far as the display of rules in a shop is concerned and in the case of Harmons typical Society of Great Britain pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain versus boots cash chemists Booth is called b-o-oots crash c-a-s-h chemists reported in 1953 one Queensland at paid 401. pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain versus booth crash chemists reported in 1953 one coincident and space four zero one and these are the facts and holding that are taken from jio pool's case book on contract law 13th edition remember they are referring to pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain Mrs busca's chemist and we'll use this case to also demonstrate that the display of bulls in a shop with prices attached does not amount to an offer but rather amounts to an invitation to treat pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain versus boots Clash chemists and these are the brief facts taken from the Opus case book on contact law the brief facts boots was charged with an offense another Pharmacy on poisons Act of 1933 section 18 which required that sales of poisons in part one of the poisonous list take place under the supervision of a registered pharmacist boots operated a self-service system and a pharmacist at the cash desk was authorized to prevent the removal of any drug from the premises the factor determining whether an offense have been committed was the point as with the sale in the cell survey shop has taken would begin to have taken place now let me explain this fact to you there's a law that says that seal of poisons in part one of the poisonous list must take place under the supervision of a medical pharmacist nowadays people in this case boots they will put a sound service system and the pharmacist in this case was at the cast desk and his role was to prevent removal of any drug from the premises so the question will be the law says that you are not supposed to offer these drugs for sale unless there's a supervision of a registered pharmacist now if they still might be done under the supervision of a relative pharmacist if I take the poison from the shelf and I'm walking with it to the counter would they still begin to have been concluded either so we didn't have been completed and it means that the Boost cash people are have violated the law but let us see what the Lord says what was held it was known that a display of goods in a shop window where the price ticket attached was merely an invitation to treat and not an offer for sale so that no offense had been committed a display of bulls in a shop window with a price ticket attached was merely an invitation to treat and not an offer for sale so that no offense had been committed and another report specifically for what the learner Justice Lord God CJ said and his statement is so important that the moment you listen to his statement any doubt you have in your mind about display of goods in a shop amounted to an invitation to treat would have been cleared that's what Lord graffiti said and I quote so I'm quoting Lord Brother CD in this case of pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain versus good cash chemists ported in 1953 one Queensbridge I played 401. this is what I've never just said and I quote I think that it is a well-established principle that the mere exposure of goods for zero by a shopkeeper in the case with the public that he is willing to treat but does not amount to an offer to sell I'll take that portion again I think that it is a well established principle that a mere exposure of ghouls for sale by a shopkeeper indicates to the public and he is willing to treat foreign to an offer to sell I do not think I ought to hold that that principle is completely reversed merely because there is a self-service scheme such as this in operation in my opinion it comes to know more than that the customer is informed that he may himself pick up an article and bring its children shopkeeper with a view to buying it and but only if the shopkeeper then expresses his willingness to sell the contract is completed let me take that portion again in our opinion it comes to no more than that this customer it's informed that he may himself pick up the article and bring it to the shopkeeper with the view to buying it and if but only if the shopkeeper then expresses his willingness to sell the contracts for sale is completed in fact the offer is an offer to buy and there's no offer to sell the customer brings the goals to the shopkeeper to see whether he will sell or not let me explain this proportion before I move ahead now what Laura CJ is saying is that when you the customer you pick up the item and you get to the counter you are rather making the offer to buy and then the offer to buy may or may not be accepted by the seller so it is only when you take the item from the show you go to the counter and you make the offer to buy it is only when the seller accepts it that a contract will be doing to have come into existence but if you take it to the counter the seller will refuse to sell it and that's why you don't have anything to do you cannot do focal if you take an item from a shelf you get to the counter and the seller refuse it to sell to you you cannot do anything about it you must go back put it down because you have made an offer to buy and the seller has declined that particular offer so Barbara CJ says that in my opinion it comes to know more than that the customer is informed that he may himself pick up an article and bring it to the shopkeeper with a view to buying it and if but only if the shopkeeper then expresses his willingness to sell the contract for sale is completed in fact the offer is an offer to buy and there's no offer to sell the customer brings the goods to the shopkeeper to see whether he will sell or not in 99 cases out of a hundred he will sell and if so he accepts the customers offer but he need not do so the very fact that the supervising pharmacists is at a place where the money has to be paid is an indication to the purchaser that a shopkeeper may not be willing to complete a contract with anybody who may bring the goods to him I agree with the illustration put forward during the case of a person who might go into a shop where books are displayed in most bookshops customers are invited to go in and pick up books and look at them even if they do not actually buy them there is no contract by the shopkeeper to sell until the customer has taken the book to the shopkeeper or in assistance and said I want to buy this book and the shopkeeper says yes let me take that portion again and these are the words of Lord God and CD and the case important pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain versus moose cash chemists and I'm quoting Law and Order CG there is no contract by the shopkeeper to sell until the customer has taken the book to the shopkeeper or his assistants and said I want to buy this book and the shopkeeper says yes that would not prevent the shopkeeper seeing the book pick up scene I'm sorry I cannot let you have that book it is the only copy I have got and I have already promised it to another customer therefore in my opinion the mere fact that a customer picks up a bottle of Medicine from the shelves in this case does not a mountain and acceptance of an offer to sell it is an offered by the customer to buy and there's no sale affected and so the buyers offer to buy is accepted by the acceptance of the price the offer the acceptance of the price and therefore the sale take place under the salvation of the pharmacists end of course so what have we seen in this case of pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain this is Boost customer we are told in this case that the display of goods in a shop does not amount to an offer to sell but rather it is an invitation to treat it is inviting the customers who enter the shop to rather make the offer to buy which the seller may or may not accept and so this case of pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain versus boost cars chemists is in line with the kids official and Bill all holding that the display of goods in a shop with biased attached does not amount to an offer but rather amounts to an invitation to treats and as the buyers who make the offer with a seller me or may not accept so you are done with the first form of invitation to treat I.E the display of rules in the shop the next form of invitation to treat we shall look at are advertisements and the general rule is that's why people advertise in a newspaper particular products the advertisement in the newspaper is an invitation to treat and not an offer and so a newspaper advertisement of a particular product is not an is not an offer but rather it's an invitation to treat it is inviting the people to whom the advertisement is made to rather come and make the offer and over here I refer you to the case of Partridge versus Christianity Patrick versus Great Indian now what are the brief facts of this case the plaintiff in this case place an advertisement in a periodical the advertisement was in essence advertising a particular bed for sale and then he was charged with the offense of offering for sale a wild live birth control to the protection of best Act of 1954. so there was an acting question that had criminalized the offering of sad base for sale now the actors criminalized offering dispers too and you have got to advertise that this bed is being sold it was held by Lord Parker that the advertisement of the particular bed was not an offer for sale but was only an invitation to treat and therefore the person in this case could not be held liable for the offense charged that is the case of Partridge versus Crittenden Patrick versus Krypton so we've seen the second form of invitation to treat Houston advertisement with others say that an advertisement of bulls does not amount to an offer but rather amounts to an inhibitation to treats to remember the case of Professor and bell and then pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain versus budka's chemist those two cases relate to display of ghouls in a shock window with a Priceless attaches that those display of wounds in a shock window do not amount to an offer by the other amount to an invitation to treat and now you look at advertisements Patrick and quittingly to treats but one question I have to give is that even though we have heard that in Patrick and quitting them an advertisement for goods amount to an invitation to treat another offer there are some cases in the law where an advertisement may be interpreted as an offer and not an invitation to treat in other words even though we have seen impacted and creating that an advertisement is an invitation to treat another offer I'm saying that by the authorities there are some cases whereby an advertisement can amount to an offer and not an invitation to treat the clearest case that can demonstrate this is a case of Kaleo versus carbonics versus c-a-r-l-i-l-l Khalil versus Carbonic c-a-r-b-o-m-i-c smoke ball Khalil versus Carbonic smoke ball Company Limited reported in 1893 one Queens bench at pins two five six now the facts of this case are that the defendants in this case that is the carbonics book ball Company Limited they made and sold a particular medical preparation and the name of this medical preparation was the carbolic smoke ball the defendants made and sold America for a prison called the carbolic smoke ball thank you that is the defendant in this case the advertisement was conveyed in a newspaper with the following words I'm going to quote the words of advertisements so you know you can understand why the courts in this case would behold that the advertisement in this case would not amount to an invitation to treat but rather be an offer these are the words of the adverts and their quotes 100 pounds sterling reward will be paid by The carbonics Movement Company to any person who contracts the increasing epidemic influenza codes or any disease caused by taking code after having used the ball three times daily for two weeks according to the printed directions supplied with each ball one thousand pounds is deposited with Alliance Bank within streets showing our interests in the matter now at this point you realize that small boat company is saying that we have manufactured this particular smoke wall and we are saying that whoever will use the smoke bomb according to our instructions and they will contract the increasing epidemic influenza wholesale disease we shall give you an amount of money 100 pounds so there are many advertisements and all they are requiring is that anybody should go and buy this logo use according to the instructions and if you get an influenza you are going to be paid an amount of money now the question in this case is that the display of these Goods and not one person to rely on advertisements so there are plenty of in this case that is Khalil he relied on advertisement purchased one of the smoke walls at the chemist he used it in compliance with advertisements and lo and behold he contracted the influenza and he sued the defendants the cabinets mobile Company Limited for the 100 pounds by the defendants refused to pay one question for the court to decide was whether the advertisement in this case whether it was an offer or an invitation to treat [Music] of this case are that the defendant company manufacture particular medical preparation the advertise and whoever will take this medical preparation buys used according to the instructions and contact the influenza he shall be paid an amount of money the plaintiff in this case bought a medical preparation according to the instructions contracted influenza and assume the defender for the money but the defendants have refused to pay the question was whether the advertisements are Monday to offer our invitation to treat now the court in this case held that the advertisement in this case and and for the reason why the court stole this particular conclusion we shall refer to the wealth of the name of Justice Lindley algae and this is what the Leonard Johnson said and the kids in point is I live with his carbonics mobile Company Limited and these are the words of the judge now that point is common to the word of disadvertisements and to the weight of all an advertisement offering Rewards they are offers to anybody who performs the conditions name in advertisements and anybody who does perform the conditions accept the offer in point of law this advertisement is an offer to pay 100 pounds to anybody who will perform these conditions and the performance of the conditions is the acceptance of the offer I'll take the portion once again in point of law these advertisements these advertisements you can offered to pay 100 pounds to anybody who will perform this conditions and the performance of these conditions is acceptance of the offer and so that's what it was held in this case lending is what I have to say as follows the supposing that the performance of the conditions is the acceptance of the offer there are sometimes ought to have been notified unquestionably as a general proposition when an offer is made it is necessary in order to make a binding contact not only that if you accepted but that the acceptance should be notified but is that so in cases of this kind I think the true view in the case of this kind is that the person who make the offer Shoes by his language and from the nature of the transaction that he does not expect and does not require notice of the acceptance apart from notice of the performance now for those of you who are losing track of the facts the brief facts of this case of Khalil versus carbonics mobile Company Limited is that the defendants manufacture and medical preparation according to the instructions and contract the influenza cold or another disease which I'll pay you 100 pounds the principle the medical population uses according to the instructions and has constructed contracted the influenza he asked you for the money the defendants were saying that the advertisement did not amount on offer because they don't know the way and that is it was caused it was requiring the performance of a specific Act and the performance of that specific Act is what will amount to acceptance is that if you make this kind of contracts where he said that whoever whoever shall do this we shall pay this amount of money by saying that whoever shall do this one you yourself you are waving your right to receive notice of acceptance because by a corner they are saying that all that you require is that there must be the performance so for example examples will be reward contracts you are looking for a particular Armed robber you see that whoever Salah read it I'm Robert which I'll pay you hundred thousands I don't have to notify you that I'm going to arrest the Armed robber all I need to do is to go and look for him as soon as I perform the act of arresting him you must pay me my hundred thousands that is the example of fact that you have in Khalil versus Carbonic smooth ball Company Limited so all the examples you see about reward contact only saying that they are looking for this criminal whoever can help them arrest repeat this amount that statement amounts to an offer to the whole world and so whoever goes ahead of him now will be need to have accepted the offer and so he can sue for the payment of the money so in this case of Canada versus Carbonic smoke more Company Limited we are being told that an advertisement can also be construed as an offer especially when the advertisement qualifies as what you can call a general offer and offer being mixed with the whole world which is only requiring the performance of an act as an acceptance in that case whoever goes to perform the ACT will be deemed have accepted the offer and that's why Lindley else says that now the point is common to the wealth of this advertisement into the words of all other advertisements of rewards their office to anybody who performs the conditions name in advancement and anybody who does perform the conditions accept the offer in point of law this advertisement is an offer to pay 100 pounds to anybody who will perform these conditions and the performance of the conditions and acceptance of the offer then the case of Khalil when his carbonics book ball Company Limited and the job is Lindley LG now I remember we had to look at this case because we imagine empowering and creating them that an advertisement amounts to an invitation to treat and we use the skills of cologne and carbonics mobile to demonstrate that it is not in every case that an advertisement will amount to and will be destined to treat and as we've seen in Cologne and carbonate mobile company advertisement to pay 100 pounds to anybody who will use the smoke ball was consumed as an offer and not an invitation to treat now another case that demonstrated an advertisement can also begin to be an invitation to treat in the case of leftovers versus great Minneapolis surplus stores left coverage is called l e f k o w i t z left poets versus great Minneapolis Surplus course this case also demonstrates that there are times when an advertisement can also be construed to be an offer and not an invitation to treat the fact of this case are quite interesting there were three Fair quotes that were advertised in a newspaper with the following words Saturday 9 A.M three brand new Fair quotes worth 100 pounds 100 dollars first come first set one dollar each again three Fair courts were advertised in a newspaper for the following words Saturday 9 A.M three brand new Fair coats with one hundred dollars one dollar each Saturday 9 A.M Sun three brand new Fair quotes worth one hundred dollars first come first thing one dollar each the plaintiffs showed up first at 9am but a defendant refused to sell to Plaintiff so you see if advertised in your newspaper Saturday 9 A.M sub three brand new Fair quotes worth 100 first come first and one dollar each and he said first come offensive the defender should have faced at my aim and when he came you feed yourself to the plaintiff my friend whatever you advertise even so far you said first come first thing even though it's an advertisement in law if you put your amount on offer so since I came there first my coming Day first is supposed to be due to your acceptance and say myself to me what did the course hold the Supreme Court of Minnesota Health that the advertisement in this case amounted to an offer and not an invitation to treat this is because there was no restriction of the advertisement to only woman which was made clear from the advertisement the defendants did not have the right to limit their rights to Only Women after the playing team had showed up so we've seen in this case of left poets versus great Minneapolis that is the advertised and the scope of advertisement is very clear it leaves nothing further for negotiation like I've seen in leftovers versus great Minneapolis Stars your advertisement will be construed as an offer and not an invitation to treat that is leftovers and great menopause so at this point but you must bear in mind is that we have referred to the case of Patrick and Brittany remember we are discussing the different forms of invitation to treat we've already done the display of goods in a shop where results of the cake officer and Bell and pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain versus bulls cash chemists and these two cases you must remember them they demonstrate that when you display Goods in a shop with prices attached the amounts one if it takes you to treat and not an offer then we went to advertisement while we refer to the case of Partridge and creating and nobody ever mentioned that an advertisement of goose will not amount on offer by only amount to an invitation to treat that's Patrick and greeting and from this case we mentioned that even though this can't say that an embattlement of goods amongst you an advertisement amount to an Evidence we mentioned that there are times when our business can amount to an offer and an example we saw was the case of Khalil versus carbonics mobile Company Limited in this case demonstrates that when you advertise and you saw the whole world now whoever will do this you shall pay the business amount of money your advertisement will be constituted to be a general offer it will begin to be a natural offer to the whole world and whoever shall performed the act that you prescribed will begin to have accepted your offer and you must be the person demonstrates that even though we've seen impacted in Christianity that an advertisement is supposed to be an invitating to treat their time for an advertisement can rather be consumed to be an offer as a ceiling Khalil versus kabulous mobile Company Limited in another case we used to battle that was the case of left poets versus greater Minneapolis upon stores where you advertise three Fair calls you see Saturday 9 A.M sub first come first saved the first confess that means that you are making an offer to whoever will come there first and so we've seen Patrick and Clinton hello and carbonics mobile company and the leftovers versus great Minneapolis so we are done with two forms of invitation to treat we are done with display of goods and they're done with advertisements the next example we shall look at as far as invitation to today's concerned is tender notices tender notices sometimes somebody wants to sell a particular product or you want to buy a particular product and you inviting this so people will submit attendance that I can supply you with this at this price I can supply you with this at this price you want air conditioning you invited 10 days people are supplying giving 10 days then I can supply you with this at this point so you get tenders from 10 people one person says I can give you 100 F on business at 100 Ghana cedis each each other says I can give you 100 air conditioning and 500 series each now what does the law say about this can the person who Supply the best tender begin to be the one that has won the contracts or if you probably the external notice the people who submit attendance are they the ones making the offer let's see what the law says the general rule then versus General general rule is that where a person invites tenders for a specified project such an invitation to Tender is an invitation to treat and not an offer the offer is rather made by the person who submits the tender the offer is rather made by the person who submits the tender and the acceptance takes place when the person who invites attendance accepts one of the tenders in appropriate cases the course May hold that an invitation to Tender may be an offer but the general rule is that where a person invites 10 days for a special projects the invitation is an invitation to treats and the people who submit attendance are the ones who rather make the offer the clearest case that demonstrates this principle is a case of Spain services Haddon reported in 1918-17 and these are the facts of the case a circular was sent out by defendants indicating that the defendants had been instructed to offer for sale certain Goods by tender the second law gave the time and date another 10 days will be received the plaintiff submitted the highest bid by the defendants refused to sell to them the plaintiff they are constitute a legend that is offered to sell the rules to the highest weather and since that day printers have submitted the highest bid the defendants were bound to sell to them think about it circular Center by defendant saying that they have been instructed to sell some things my tender so everybody gives the thing that I mean how much they are ready to buy it from the plaintiff in this case was the one who submitted the highest tender but the Defenders who refuse yourself to them so please but if you have invited to sell good bartender that tender that you invited was an offer so since I was the highest you must sell to me by force foreign now the court Health in this case that in advertisements for 10 days for buildings it is not easy to say that the contract will be given to the lowest weather and not always that the contract is made with the lowest beta and I here there's a total absence of anywhere to intimate now the highest beta is to be the purchaser it is a mere attempt to ascertain whether an offer can be obtained will they start imagine other sellers are willing to adopt so the first in this case construed the invitation to self-attender as an invitation to treat and the people who were submitting the bids were the ones making the office is an indication that when you invite people to come in like yeah you want to sell things by tender the people who submit the bids are the one or whatever are making the office which may or may not be accepted by the person inviting the Tinder now that is the case of Spencer and Hardy but remember I gave a question that even though I said that invitation to sell Goods by tender it's an invitation to treat remember important that inappropriate cases the courts behold that an invitation to Tender was in fact an offer so if you are inviting tenders by giving an expert statement that whoever shall Summit the highest bid you shall sell to the person then that's one your statements can be construed to be an offer and so let us look at the case of Havana avela Investments Limited versus Royal Trust Company of Canada Limited however investment limited versus Royal Trust Company of Canada Limited now this was a case in which Goods were advertised and let me read a fact to you the first defendant opted to sell their shares by a sealed competitive tender they then invited the two parties who were most likely to be interested in the shares to each submit a single sealed offer for the affairs the defendant stated in their invitation that they would accept the highest offer to take books they have stated in their invitation that they will accept the highest offer received by them and we shall comply with the terms of the invitation the claimants tended a fixed bit of 4 million 175 000 dollars on the other hand the second defendant ended a refreshable of two million one hundred thousand dollars or 101 000 bonus in excess of any other offer whichever is the higher the federal government accepted the second Defenders bet treating it as us 2 million 276 000 the United States dollars now let me explain the fact over here the fair defendants are opting to sell their shares by sealed competitive vendor tender and then they are invited the two parties who were most likely to be interested to submit that a single a single student offer for their shares and they have mentioned that whoever shall submit the highest offer that one which ourselves to that particular person now agreements tenant a fixed bit of two million one 175 thousand dollars but the second defendant standard a refreshable of two million one hundred thousand dollars I mean that is lower than the other one of two million 175 thousand dollars so the claimant is all who tended for the two million 175 thousand dollars second Defender attended a reference a bit of two million one hundred thousand dollars but the second event I'm trying to be smart so even though it make a bid for two million one hundred thousand dollars he added or one hundred and one thousand dollars in excess of Indiana offer so he's trying to play two million one hundred thousand dollars all and that's not one hundred and one thousand dollars and that is the one rather that was accepted by the first defendant to the Clements Union said that my friend I made a bid for two million 175 thousand dollars 175 000 he made two million one hundred thousand dollars mine is higher than his so I was the one is supposed to sell two now what is the password it was held in this case that the first different bands were bumped to accept the Clement's bit and in this case the invitation to Tender was construed as an offer over in the natural contract to sell the shares to the highest it is important to note that the invitation to Tender was construed as an offer even though the invitation actually at the claimants and the second three months and second defendant to submit an offer with respect to the big made by the second defendant it was held to be invalid because the object of the invitation made by the vendors was to ascertain the highest amount which is party was prepared to pay and that purpose will be defeated by the referential pitch and therefore in this case of Havana we have been told that the court construed the invitation to sell by tender that invitation that was accompanied by expressways experts undertaking to accept their highest rate they call construed that invitation to be an offer and not an invitation to treats harvella investment limited personal Trust Company of Canada Company Limited it means that even though we have seen indicator's pleasure and Haddon that invitation to sell by tender will be an invitation to treat when they invitation by tender it's accompanied by Express words that you will sell to the person who make the highest bid as we have seen in harvella investment limited versus World Trust Company of Canada the invitation will be construed as an offer and not an invitation to treat where we saw that if you advertise Goods the advertisement will be caused you to be an invitation to treat another offer remember part of the greeting then why we choose that particular position now even though we do that position in Patrick and greeting then who are quick to come and intervene and mention that even though generally advertisements are invitation to treat see remember why even though we are an advertisement it was construed to be an offer and we also look at the case of leftovers versus great Minneapolis Stars 12 confesses that even though it was an advertisement the way that accompanying advertisement made the construe that advertisement as an offer notices you remember internal notices too we saw in Spencer and Haddon that and and invitation to sell Goods by tender will be dainty and irritating to treat a member's friends and have it now we've also added that even though and if it isn't to sell book by tender is an intend to treat remember you've added that when the invitation to sell by tender is accompanied by an expert undertaking that you will accept the highest bid then that one that could be construe it to be an offer and not an invitation to treats and authority to practice that is the case of however Investments Limited versus Royal Trust Company of Canada to look at three forms of evidence so far we have looked at display of rules for sale when we look at Fisher and Bell pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain versus boost cast chemists we look at advertisements for goods of services in the newspaper while you're seeing Patrick and christenden company and insane leftovers participating Minneapolis stores we've down to 10 days while we said that an invitation to sell good by tender is supposed to be an invitation to treat generally and that's an offer and nobody will look expensive and Hardy but they mentioned that if it is accompanied by expressways if they invitation to serve by Tender Is accompanied by expressway that you shall sell to the highest Builder then that's when the invitation will be construed to be an offer now let us now go to actions use options use option sales now the general rule is that we're an auctioneer invite bits to be made at an auction the offer is not made by the action yeah but rather the offer is made by the person who is making debate when the bet is made it is accepted by the auctioneer by the Striking of the table with his hammer foreign what does this principle mean it means that if it has been advertised that goods are being sold by option when you attend the auction you who say that ten thousand twenty thousand thirty thousand forty thousand all of you who are making this big hundred thousand going 50 000 is good always making the beats you are the one making the offer and the auctioneer may or may not accept this offer your own making so that invitation to sell by option is an invitation to treat the invitation is investing base that's one is an invitation to treat and the people who mentioned ten thousand twenty thousand thirty thousand forty thousand fifty thousand going going 100 000 going 200 however the people mentioned this bit are the ones making the office which may or may not be accepted by wrong senior and it is tried the table with the hammer that is when he who said that he has not accepted a particular offer doesn't meet and the Authority for this is the case of Harrison versus Nickerson Harrison versus Nickerson remember the principle is that an invitation to make bit as an auction is an invitation to treat and not an offer an authority is Harrison versus Nickerson reported in 1873 lr8 or Queens bank and page 286. over the first of this case the fact are that the defendant who was an auction playing an advertisement in the London papers indicating that certain materials including some office furniture and plants will be sold by him at a particular place and specify this so the defendant and Auctioneer place an advertisement in the London papers indicating that certain materials including some office furniture and plants would be sold by him at a particular place on specified days the plaintiff who had a commission to purchase the furniture traveled from London for the zoo however when he went to the place indicated in the adverts he was able to pay the certain laws apart from the goals that have been described as office furniture in the adverts which have been withdrawn and will not put up for sale the playing Team then instituted the action against the defendants to recall for his loss of time and expenses let me explain what is happening here you are going to place an advert in the landing papers the second materials including some furniture you mentioned Furniture nobody sent you you may not office furniture will be sold by you at a particular place and I come to the designated police only for him to get there and then that furniture that you advertise you have redone it is always again plenty was so angry then students said that a friend you must pay me for all the loss of time and expenses so the question then will be invitation to come and make a bid can they be construed to be an offer to you or to be an invitation that's when you go to accepted if you are wrong motivated offer then why do you why do you even go and sue him so let us see how the court will construe the invitation to people to make bet as an auction where the public comes through it to be an offer or an invitation to treat the course held in this case that I remember my friends the kids of Harrison Mrs Lakers another advertisement to investing the bits at the auction was not a contractual offer but was merely an invitation to treat therefore the advertisement did not amount to a promise by adoption yeah that all of the Articles advertised would be put up for sale again the advertisement was not a contractual offer but was only inhibitating to treat therefore the advertisement did not amount to A Promise by the auctioneer and all of the Articles advertised will put up with you the defendant was therefore knowledgeable in Damages so you see this king of Harrison and Nickerson is telling us that when Bulls are advertised to be sold by option the advertisement amounts to an invitation to treats and is the people who attend the auction who make the bids they are the ones who want to make the office we mail or may not be accepted by the auction yeah so in this case where you traveled from far and then you went and the rules that you wanted to buy had been redone you cannot do Focus about it because the invitation that you should come and make the bits that invitation was an invident to treat and not an offer and that when you go you are the one goes with the offer and the offer even when you make it he maybe refused to accept it so it has been doing it how do you complete so of course in Damages so remember that as far as option sales are concerned according to Harrison and Nickerson then an invitation to persons that you want to sell book by auction it is supposed to begin to be an invitation to treat and not a contractual offer now I remember that option sales can either be an option sales subject to a reserve price or the one without a reserve price now let me deal with the auction sale without reserve price now when you attend an auction and the often is advertised as without reserve price what does it mean it means that the vendor shall be ready to sell the goods to whoever shall be the highest bidder regardless of what the price of such a business so if you advertising your vehicle by option to the highest bidder if I make a break of one Ghana cedi and no other person makes any other bit and the time is over I'm the one that you saw the castle for one month don't even complain because nobody sent you to advertise your options used without reserve price if it is without reserve price then it means that a person offering the property either person advertising the property as an option soon you are ready to sell to whoever shall be the highest bidder whether you like the price or you don't like it so if it's your house and East legon in the greater Academy of the Republic of Ghana very very luxurious area and you say that you are auctioning your house without reserve price if I make a bit of 10 Ghana cedi 10 Ghana cedi and then no other person makes any Arabic you must form your house to me I think Ghana City we don't care whether the house worth a million dollars or not you must send this to me at that price that is auction sale without recent price and take notes and do not forget this warning if I make the big of your uncle 10 the owner cannot come and say that he's beating 100 000 cities so that he will score my bait when you advertise without Visa price the owner or his agents cannot make a bid at the auctions you and the opinion cannot morally accept a bit from a person knowing that that person too is the owner of the purpose in the case that you would like so much that demonstrates this in the case of wallow versus Harrison and Harrison this is what happened in that case the defendant and auctioneer advertise the sale of a hall by auction he stated in the notice that the sale would be without reserve price the plaintiff attended the sale and made a single bit of 60 Guinness for the horse the horse's owner Henderson beat 61 Guinness for the same horse I don't know what is happening here you have advertised without recent price and the plaintiff have made sense to be the beat of the Guinness then the hustle owner the owner Anderson he bases one Guinea for the same horse then the defendant option here then knocked down the Halls to the said Henderson who was the owner of the horse how do you do that to to the owner of the horse the application suit claiming that their horse was or heated plenty because he was the highest burner 3D or the new purchaser as an old reserved seal he said that he was the one who made the highest benefit the good faith and the new bit so he's the one that you're supposed to get with you and I'm not agree with him that's because the sale was advertised without a reserve price then it came with a promise that you sell to whoever was the highest bonus and the highest very better than this case but they're plenty because he made a single bit of 60 Guinness the other person who made them takes one Guinness he didn't make it in good faith because he's the owner and the law were a bit honest for making debits whatever they advertise they sell us without reserve price thank you so let me tell you the fact again then I'll take you to the holding the defendant advertise the sale of a heart by auction and he stated in the notice that the sale will be without reserve price the plaintiff attended the sale and made a single bit of sister guineas for the horse owner Henderson bit 61 Guinness for the same horse the defendant Auctioneer Knocked Down the Horse to the third Henderson who was the owner for 61 Guinness foreign that the advertisement without reserve price gave me the second promise that you sell to the highest Bonafide producer she was supposed to go to the plaintiff but let me put the express words from the judge so that you can get the import very well it is so important that I must put an extenso addiction of the judge so that you can appreciate it very well wallow and Harrison and we are quoting the victim of Martin B and I'm quoting the cell was announced to be without Reserve this according to all the cases both have law and equity means that neither the vendor nor any person in his behalf shall be at the auction and that the property shall be sold to the highest Builder whether the sun beat the appear to the row value or not we think the auctioneer who puts up the property are for sale upon such a condition pledges himself that the same shall be without Reserve or in other words contracts that it shall be so and that this content is made with the highest Bonafide better and in case of a bridge of it that he has a right of action against auctioneer this is also a comment that was powered by joku in his book contract more attentive Edition on P30 this is how he commented on the case of wallow and Harrison there were two agreements please determining the purchaser of the goose in this context the latest bit was an offer but since his bit was not accepted he was not entitled to the horse that will knock down to the owner however there was a second agreement since the advertisement of an auction sale would doubt Reserve is a unilateral offer by the ocean yeah that more Reserve will be applied Martin B indicates that the highest Bonafide better can accept this in natural offer so all we are saying over here is that when you advertise yourself without reserve price then you are saying that you shall sell it to whoever shall be the highest bidder and so whoever shall make the highest bid will begin from accepted to offer that you've made thank you and you can only refuse yourself that particular person so actually sales without Reserve bear in mind now once you enter into your contract once you enter your options sale and says without Reserve then it means that you must sell to whoever shall be the highest gonna feed me beta hey remember what pools of your policy that it means that when you say it is without Reserve you are making an offer to whoever submit the highest bid so whoever submit the highest rate will begin to have accepted your offer you have results because you remember when we did the case of Harrison and Nickerson remains are generally an invitation to make better at an auction is an invitation to treat and not an offer you must draw the distinction between Harrison and Nickerson in the case of wallow versus Harrison that option sales without reserve price now don't go to auction sales subject to a reserve prize options in order to reserve price now while auction sale is described as one which is subject to a reserve price then note the following please never configure the truth take note of the following when the option sale is declared as subject to a reserve price one it means that a specific price has been fixed what is the result price and the vendor will not sell the goods below the said reserve price if a specific price has been fixed which is the result price the vendor will not sell the good below the reserve price so if it's a house and the result price is 100 million dollars it means that whatever bit that you make if it's below the result price then they will know it's not apply to accept it you know you don't accept it so if you have a car and you want anything more than 100 000 say that the reserve price for this vehicle is 100 000 that means that any bit a person makes that is below that one you are not Bond accepted so take notes where an option still is described as subject to a result price the following shall apply one it means that a specific price has been fixed which is a reserve price and the Bengal will not sell the goons below the service air price number two the vendor can bid only once which is at the beginning of the auction before any other builders meet the auctioneers must be under any obligation to sell the auction rules to the highest Bonafide better so long that's how the bid is below the stated with their price you see it means that if the film is started to everything price if you make if you are the health benefits if it's below the stated reserve price the auctioneer is not bound to sell it to you so you see how you can contrast this with the case of wallow and Harrison wallow and Harrison says that if it's without reserve price you sell to whoever makes the highest bid and the owner cannot make a bet because he will not be in good faith but when you come to oxygen cells without autism with a result price the oxygenia can only accept bits that are above the reserve price and they will not can only build once at the beginning that is the result so that's one any Arabic can be made if the bits are made and they are below the reserve price the oxygen is not bound to accept it so oxygen cells without reserve price you sell to whoever the highest weather but without reserve price but with reserve price someone if you're the highest bidder and your book is below the reserve price you're not going to sell to you and so that is what you see in our in Ghana you see it under session 17 one of the auction sales law 1989 pnd floor 230 is a very very important legislation section 17 subsection one of the auction sales floor 1989 PMS law two three zero that's what it says the auctioneer Southeast the particulars or conditions of seal by auction of any Goods or land where they sell is subject to whatever is without Reserve or started to a reserve price and whether a right to bid is reserved by the rainbow it means that when you are going to sell anything by auction indicates is it total to reserve price or without price so that we will know as many days how we'll go about our building so the law mandates that the oxnemouth states that this is hello to a reserve price or without reserve price is one of my favorite sections in the option sales law 1989 pianist 230.4 where the sale is subject to a reserved price as regards any one or more specified laws it shall be lawful for the event door or any other person employed by him to give one bit for each lot and no more you see where the sale is subject to a reserve price as without any one or more specified works it has been lawful for the vendor or any person employed by him to give one bit for each lot and no more and such bit shall be openly declared at the auction upon the Lord being put up for sale before any other bidding for such blocks is received accepted then the most important provision in the auction sales law if you forget any section at all this man don't have to forget it is section 17 17 of the auction sales law of 1989 PM with low 230 you must not forget this one if you forget any provision under the auction sales law 2007 and I quote where the seal is subject to a reserve price the cell shall not take effect even when the property is knocked down to the highest bidder if the highest bid is lower than the reserve price and in such a case the highest bidder has no rights of action memorandum of contracts after accepting a bit below the reserve price he thereby implied the warrants that he has authority to sell at a price linked and is liable to the purchaser for bridge or volunteer Authority meaning that where the cell is sorry to reserve price they still shall not take effect even when the property is knocked down to the highest bidder if the highest bid is lower than the reserve price so if by mistake the result prices are one million dollars and you make a bit of 5000 bonus induction by mistake knocks it down to you the law is saying that where the sin is subject to a reserve price I will not take effect the sale shall not take effect it shall not take effect even when the property is knocked down to the highest bidder if the highest bid is lower than the reserve price so if the result price is one million dollars and by mistake it is not down to you to you it comes you and compare them my word Auctioneer goes to sign a memorandum saying that you know what the result price is one million dollars but the the nurses that can sell it to you are twenty thousand dollars that one he's warranting that he has an authority to sell to other price so if it turns out like he doesn't have authority you can see the option yeah for a bit of orange and Authority even when the property is locked down to the highest bidder if the highest bid is lower than the reserve price and then also very very important is that when you come to auction sales without reserve price take a look at section 17 2003 of the auction sales law 1989 PS4 230. remember oxygenated price whoever said that you contract yourself today highest beta and not the the owner cannot make a bridge so if your house is still still at auction without resent price if I make a bit of one Galaxy yeah to me you remember we said that and we look at the case of one Harrison look at what the Ghanaian Auction Sales law says about Auction Sales without reserve price it says that while the cell is without a reserve price they shall not be lawful for the event door or any person acting on his behalf or employed by him to beat and succeed or for the auctioneer knowingly to take any salvation remember what happened in Waller and Harrison when Walo and Harrison the fact where they plaintiff that the plaintiff made a big of 50 Guinness who are still without reserve price then then the owner came to make 61 then they gave it to the owner he remember the course held that my friend as an owner if it is still without his price you cannot make a beat and of course mother made them give the item to Harrison now our Auction Sales law is saying that where the sun is without reserve price this is a target it's a subject pass in Ghana so it's giving parliamentary first but why the cell is without a result it shall not be lawful for the vendor or any person acting on his behalf or employed by him to bait as a seal it is without their price and look at section 7 2006 of the auction sales law that where the vendor or any person acting on his behalf or employed by him based at any such thing contrary to any of the provisions of the section any practicer May refuse to fulfill his purchase by the highest Bonafide better shall be entitled if we so elect to have the goods or land to offered to him I can bring an action to compel that people who should be giving the particular item so take note of the auction sales with reserve price and the one with without his price with reserve price the owner can build once okay only once but without reserve price owner we are not even allowed to make any bid at all because the rule is that they are selling to the highest Bonafide bidder and then remember when you're looking at so as far as our invitation to do this consent we have got to display of goods to dealt with oxygen cells we've done the tender notices so that's the advertisement of goose they have left with circulation of catalogs or Priceless circulation of catalogs or finalists what is the room that's circulation of apparently or catalogs advertising goods for sale shall constitute an invitation to induce persons to make office I.E in relation to treats and therefore the circulation of the price lists cannot be on offer in itself so if it is Christmas you see Malcolm circulating price list of this item for this amount the microwave 500 cities 300 cities if you travel and you get there because the circulation of prices or catalogs only amounts to and if you're dating to treat and not uncontractual offer it is when you go there and you get make your offer but the second reason the price list itself is not an offer it's only an invitation to treat so when you get there and the price has changed you can't complain because no offer to make to you that is what you mean by circulation of Priceless amounts to an invitation to treat and not um offer and the Authority for that is growing Gap h 1896 appealskins has paid three two five and this is what was held in that case I'm quoting the victim of Lord Hessel the transmission of such a price list does not amount to an offer to supply an unlimited quantity of the wine described at the price limit again the transmission of such a Priceless does not amount one offer to supply an unlimited quantity of wine described at the price limit so that as soon as an order is given there's a binding contact to supply the quantity if it was true the merchants might find himself involved in a number of contractual obligations to supply mine of a particular description which he would be quite unable to carry out his talk of wine on that description might on by necessarily Limited foreign versus golf that's transmission of a Priceless does not amount on offer but it's rather an invitation to treat so if melcom game unless more circular price lists of item that's only for Christmas Samsung the circulation of benefit is not an offer by rather an invitation to treats so when you get there and you think the circulator prices at 500 series and you get them is 1000 cities just pack your things and go don't go and complain I want to shoot them because the circulation High State amounts to an irritation to treat and it's not an offer so it's when you go there you go make an offer which they may or they may not accept so in this lecture by law of recap what we have thought to do is to explain the different forms of invitation to treat you can have we have done to display of goods in a shop why I said this love goes in the shop will not amount to an offer by our amount to an invitation to treat when we look at FaceTime bill and pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain versus Woodcraft chemists then with those with advertisement of goods in the newspaper and over there we look at the case of Patrick and Britain where we're told that the advertisement of the bed was not an offer my brother and invitation to treat but remember our caution that even though we've been told in Patrick and the businessman is only an Evidence to treat remember the king of Kaleo and kabalik's mobile Company Limited where we're told that the advertisement was continued to be an offer and we saw a similar thing in the case of leftovers versus great Minneapolis Applause to us and then we also dealt with tender notices and remember for tender we said the general rule was that an invitation to sell Goods by tender would only begin to be and irritating to treats and not an offer but I know what they will look at the case of Spencer and Haddon but we get a question but when the invitation to sell by tender is accompanied by Express words that is ourselves to the highest builder for that one you must sell to the person who become the highest bidder another look at the case of Havana Havana Investments limited this is Royal Trust Company of Canada Limited balance for internal notices look at Spencer and Haddon and then harvella there were also those with Auction Sales and over there we have to do a distinction between options without reserve price and option sales will deserve price so Auction Sales without reserve price but what they were told that you mean that you must sell to whoever shall be the highest bidder whoever shall be the highest bidder a member for auction sales if it is without the Privacy producer price it means that you cannot sell below the reserve price office that's why the people who travel from far and went there and then had been redone he couldn't do anything about it because the invitation to bid at the auction was only an invitation to treat that an invitation to sell good by option is an Evidence to treat another offer a draw a distinction we do a distinction between how change sales we deserve price and without reserve price for that reason price we look at the case of Harrison without you and Harrison without reason why we are told but if it's without reserve price the owner cannot wait that they must sell to whoever is the highest benef that's without price but even with their price it means that they cannot sell below the reserve price and remember the provisions you look at now Auction Sales law and then finally we wrap up with circulation of catalogs or Price lists where we are told that if it's a little private or catalogs they would only amount to an invitation to treat and not a contractual offer this is where we shall wrap up with our discussion on the different forms of invitation to treat in our next lecture we shall continue with the discussion on what we will then amount to um acceptance this is where we shall wrap up with our lecture thank you