• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

In the case ofButler Machine Tool Co Ltd v Ex-Cell-O Corp (England) Ltd [1979]1 WLR 401 (CA), Lord Denning advocatedan alternativeapproach to the traditional mirror-image rule forcontract formation.Discuss whether you consider the courts should adopt the traditional approach or that of Lord Denning when deciding whether a contract has been formed.

Extracts from this document...


Transfer-Encoding: chunked Module title ? Contract Law Essay title - In the case of Butler Machine Tool Co Ltd v Ex-Cell-O Corp (England) Ltd [1979] 1 WLR 401 (CA), Lord Denning advocated an alternative approach to the traditional mirror-image rule for contract formation. Discuss whether you consider the courts should adopt the traditional approach or that of Lord Denning when deciding whether a contract has been formed. To answer the question I will divide the essay into three sections; the first focusing on the traditional approach and its merits and detractions, the second concentrating on the alternative approach and its positive and negative aspects before finally considering the wider picture and which approach I believe the courts should adopt. The Traditional Approach The traditional approach to deciding whether a contract has been formed is to look at offer and acceptance. An offer can be defined as an ?expression of willingness to contract on certain terms, made with the intention that it shall become binding as soon as it is accepted by the person to whom it is addressed[1]? and acceptance as ?a final and unqualified expression of assent to the terms of an offer[2].? The court will objectively analyse the negotiation that lead to the acceptance to assess if a contract had been made and if so what terms it was made upon. One key aspect of this traditional approach is the mirror-image rule, which allows for no modifications of an offer for acceptance to be complete. ...read more.


blow in?, and that it was impractical due to the classification of three new terms (material differences, material points and residual terms) which would further complicate proceedings[11]. Although there is considerably less evidence as to how well this method may work due to the House of Lords adherence to the traditional approach it does appear to have merit in a case such as Butler, where the negotiation over terms has been convoluted to the extent that ascertaining offer and acceptance definitively is realistically impossible. It may therefore be more suitable in complex cases to attempt to identify when a general agreement was formed: this was suggested by Treitel when he considered The Satanita, a case that is considered a definitive example of how offer and acceptance are not always sufficient analytical tools[12]. There are of course problems with the alternative approach, the predominant one being that it may undermine the certainty of the law as it relies solely on judicial interpretation and there is no substantial case law to follow. It also risks objectivity, as looking at the negotiation in its entirety may lend itself to a more subjective view, although it is worth noting that Denning wanted to examine the behaviour of the parties (as opposed to what was said) which implies that it would be viewed from the perspective of the reasonable man and therefore still objective[13]. Which Approach Is Preferable? There is no doubt that the traditional method of offer and acceptance is somewhat flawed; however its relatively successful application over the years suggests that for the majority of cases it is fit for purpose. ...read more.


courts have maintained a rigid adherence to the traditional method in more current cases. This can be demonstrated by Tekdata Interconnections Ltd v Amphenol Ltd, a more recent battle of the forms in which Dyson LJ commented that ?The rules that govern the formation of contracts have been long established?that has the great merit of providing a degree of certainty which is both desirable and necessary in order to promote effective commercial relationships[25]?. In light of such sentiment it may be necessary for the traditional method to be the default approach, however it does appear that there needs to be some prearrangement for a more liberal method when required, and I believe the best solution would be to allow for judicial discretion in deciding if a case would benefit from such an approach. Although this leaves the system open to some level of uncertainty (and is admittedly also debatable with regard to the Rule of Law, as theorist AV Dicey believed discretion lead to arbitrary decisions[26]) it can be argued that it provides the judiciary with little more discretion than they already possess and would allow them to address the nature of complex cases more adequately. In conclusion it appears there are positive and negative aspects of both the traditional and alternative approach to contract formation. As one does not appear to be markedly better than the other perhaps a more just approach may be for the courts to use the traditional method of identifying offer and acceptance where possible, and when it proves otherwise employ an alternative method and look for a general agreement. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree Contract Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related University Degree Contract Law essays

  1. Valley Homes v. Ace Minerals Corp.

    Brundel broke down, confessed his misconduct and explained that because of his age he felt threatened by Jones and worried that he would lose his position to her. The president fired Brundel outright, and then went to the offices of the mining company.

  2. Advise the parties whether there is a contract between Hettie and Barbara for the ...

    Carlill did an act to accept the offer. Usually, an acceptance needs to be communicated to the offeror, however this is not a fixed rule. Even though the Carbolic Smoke Ball Company argued that Mrs. Carlill did not communicate the acceptance, the court held that she did not need to

  1. Critically examine and discuss the inter-relationship between the law of Contract and the law ...

    The leading case of Hedley Byrne v Heller17 was profound as the change in the law offered people the opportunity to sue for negligent advice leading to economic loss, even if they did not have a contract. The case started a chain of decisions sympathetic to the continuation of concurrent liability.

  2. Read the case of Baird Textile Holdings Ltd v. Marks & Spencer plc. [2001] ...

    Morison J continued that the counsel of Baird did not mention that M&S were not allowed to appoint ant other suppliers and therefore Morrison J said that whatever Baird counsel mentioned would not work and if M&S requirements were different qualities, quantities and different prices that what would happen?

  1. Critical Analysis of Butler Machines V Ex-Cell-O Corporation.

    Under traditional contract law, it is common practice to determine the existence of an agreement through the offer and acceptance model. Known as the 'mirror image' rule, it is a well established principle that in order for a contract to be formed the offer and acceptance must coincide i.e.

  2. The Decision Made by  Rougier J inBernstein v Pamson Motors can lead to fundamental ...

    Rougier ruled that such a submission was in his opinion correct. He reasoned that s(35) created its own implied affirmation of this by effectively stating the goods were accepted once the buyer had retained them for a reasonable period of time.

  1. Lord Phillips MR in Great Peace Shipping v Tsavliris Salvage (International) Ltd 2002 - ...

    In that case, it was found that an agreement to terminate a broken contract, in other words one that could have been terminated otherwise, was no different in kind to an agreement to terminate an unbroken contract. While the subject-matter of the two agreements (the service contracts)

  2. All contracts are agreements but all agreements are not contracts. Discuss.

    The sub tenants were unware that a mistake had occurred and had given valid consideration when undertaking to perform their responsibility based on the agreement according to Prasad U & Indu (2006). Agreement Expressly Declared as Void. This is classified as one of the essential element of contract.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work