Case note: Blackpool and Fylde Aero Club v Blackpool Borough Council

CONTENTS PAGE: Facts of the gaffe.............................................................3 Procedural history...........................................................4 Legal issues in dispute......................................................4 The decision..................................................................3 Analytical tidings of the implications for the principles of law regarding offer and acceptance............................................6 Current law in Australia regarding offer and acceptance..............10 Theoretical perspective.....................................................12 Conclusion...................................................................14 Bibliography.................................................................17 Blackpool and Fylde Aero gild v Blackpool Borough Council Facts of the Case: The Defendants, a local anesthetic council, owned and controld Blackpool Airport, and since 1975 had totallyow the Plaintiffs club a assigning to operate pleasure flights forth of the airport . In 1983 when the last concession was to expire, the Council sent out(a) to seven potentially raise severaliseies (including the Plaintiff) an invitation to crank for a lead year concession. The invitation was in vernacular form, it stipulated that the Council does non bind itself to accept all or either section of any sensitive and that all tenders were to be submitted in the envelope provided with the top(prenominal) confidentiality in mind. It further stated that any tenders authorized afterwards the check and time specified would non be considered. The Plaintiffs stick on their tender in compliance with the time specifications and instruction manual.

However because of an affright the Town Clerk rung failed to empty the letter boxful that day and subsequently the Plaintiffs tender was recorded as reality too late for consideration. The Defendants genuine another tender (lower than the Plaintiffs) and the fellowship then bought an action against the Council for happy chance of contract and negligence (which event not be discussed here). The form of address contended that the Council had warranted that if a tender was true in accordance with their instructions it would be duly considered and the Council had acted in breach of that warranty. Procedural History: The case originated in the Queens workbench Division at Manchester... If you requisite to get a encompassing essay, order it on our website: Ordercustompaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my paper