Bourhill V Young [1943] ac 92

Partridge v Crittenden [1968] 1 WLR 1204
Facts
Mr Partridge, the defendant, advertised in a magazine that he had Bramblefinch cock and hens to sell. The price he quoted for each bird was 25 Shillings. The Bramblefinch was a protected bird category under the the Protection of Birds Act 1954 and he was consequently charged with offering to sale a protected bird species.
Decision
The advertisement was an invitation to treat and not an offer for sale and, therefore, no offence had been committed.

Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company [1892] EWCA Civ 1
Facts
A Newspaper advert placed by the defendant stated:-

• 
  £100 reward will be paid by the Carbolic Smoke Ball Company to any person who contracts the influenza after having used the ball three times daily for two weeks according to the printed directions supplied with each ball.
  
• 
  £1000 is deposited with the Alliance Bank, shewing our sincerity in the matter.
  
• 
  Mrs Carlill purchased some smoke balls and used them according to the directions and caught flu. She sought to claim the stated £100 reward.
  

Routledge v Grant [1828] 4 Bing 653
Facts
Grant wrote to Routledge offering to purchase the lease of his house. The offer was to remain open for six weeks. Grant then changed his mind about purchasing the lease and, within the six weeks, withdrew his offer. After Routledge had received Grant’s letter withdrawing the offer he wrote to Grant, within the six weeks, accepting Routledge’s offer.
Decision
Offer could be withdrawn within the six-week period without incurring any liability. 


Hyde v Wrench [1840] EWHC Ch J90
Facts
The defendant offered to sell a farm to the claimant for £1,000. The claimant in reply offered £950 which the defendant refused. The claimant then sought to accept the original offer of £1,000. The defendant refused to sell to the claimant and the claimant brought an action for specific performance.
Decision

There was no contract. Where a counter offer is made this destroys the original offer so that it is no longer open to the offeree to accept.

Powell v Lee [1908] 99 LT 284
Facts

• 
  The claimant applied for a post as headmaster. He was called for an interview and later informed by one of the managers, who had no authorisation from the Board of Managers, that he was successful. The Board later decided to re-open the matter and gave the post to someone else. The claimant sued for breach of contract.
  

Decision

• 
  There was no contract between the Board and the Claimant as the communication of acceptance was not by an authorised agent.
  

Felthouse v Bindley [1862] EWHC CP J35
Facts

• 
  A nephew discussed buying a horse from his uncle. He offered to purchase the horse and said if I don't hear from you by the weekend I will consider him mine. The horse was then sold by mistake at auction. The auctioneer had been asked not to sell the horse but had forgotten. The uncle commenced proceedings against the auctioneer for conversion. The action depended upon whether a valid contract existed between the nephew and the uncle.
  

Decision

• 
  There was no contract. You cannot have silence as acceptance.
  

Adams v Lindsell [1818] 106 ER 250
Facts

• 
  The defendant wrote to the claimant offering to sell them some wool and asking for a reply 'in the course of post'. The letter was delayed in the post. On receiving the letter the claimant posted a letter of acceptance the same day. However, due to the delay the defendant's had assumed the claimant was not interested in the wool and sold it on to a third party. The claimant sued for breach of contract.
  

Decision

• 
  There was a valid contract which came in to existence the moment the letter of acceptance was placed in the post box. This case established the postal rule. This applies where post is the agreed form of communication between the parties and the letter of acceptance is correctly addressed and carries the right postage stamp. The acceptance then becomes effective when the letter is posted.
  

Balfour v Balfour [1919] 2 KB 571
Facts

• 
  A husband worked overseas and agreed to send maintenance payments to his wife. At the time of the agreement the couple were happily married. The relationship later soured and the husband stopped making the payments. The wife sought to enforce the agreement.
  

Decision

• 
  The agreement was a purely social and domestic agreement and therefore it was presumed that the parties did not intend to be legally bound.
  

Ready Mixed Concrete Ltd v Minister of Pensions[1968] 2 QB 497

Facts
❖The Ready Mixed Concrete delivered concrete. To do that the company had hired lorry drivers and the contract between the two parties was a contract for services, i.e. self-employment. The lorries used in delivering concrete were bought by the drivers on hire purchase. The vehicles were painted in company colours and the drivers had to look after and insure the vehicles themselves. The lorries could not be used for any other purposes other than to deliver the concrete. The drivers had to wear a uniform and were required to work when needed and were paid on services carried out for the company.
❖The Ready Mixed Concrete was not paying the National Insurance contribution for its lorry drivers as it regarded them as independent contractors; but the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance considered the drivers as employees and therefore wanted the company to pay the National Insurance contribution under the National Insurance Act 1965

Carmichael v National Power plc [1999] UKHL 47

Facts
✓C worked as a tour guide at a power station. She had no fixed hours, but could be called at any time when a party of tourists was expected. Tax and national insurance were deducted from her pay, which was calculated on an hourly rate. When a collective union agreement increased pay generally at the site, her pay also increased following that agreement.
Decision
✓C was not an employee, because there was no mutuality of obligation. When she was called to work, that created a contract just for the duration of that day’s work. She was not obliged to accept any particular day’s work, and so she was not an employee.




<sup>https://www.zippia.com/citigroup-careers-2493/history/

https://www.companieshistory.com/deutsche-bank/

https://www.hsbc.com/who-we-are/our-history

https://www.statista.com/topics/3913/barclays-bank/#topicOverview

https://www.referenceforbusiness.com/history2/54/LLOYDS-BANK-PLC.html

https://www.opencorporation.org/en/company/national-westminster-bank-plc-natwest</sup>