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

CONTENTS PAGE: Facts of the case.............................................................3 Procedural history...........................................................4 Legal issues in dispute......................................................4 The decision..................................................................3 analytical Discussion 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 granted the Plainti ffs club a assignment to operate pleasure flights out of the airport . In 1983 when the last concession was to expire, the Council sent out to seven potentially interested severaliseies (including the Plaintiff) an invitation to crank for a three year concession. The invitation was in common form, it stipulated that the Council does non bind itself to accept all or every part of any dictation and that all friendlys were to be submitted in the windbag provided with the top(prenominal) confidentiality in mind. It further stated that any tenders authorized after the date and time specified would not be considered. The Plaintiffs take on their tender in accordance with the time specifications and instructions.

still bec! ause of an solicitude the Town Clerk Staff failed to empty the garner boxful that day and subsequently the Plaintiffs tender was recorded as cosmos too late for consideration. The Defendants accepted another tender (lower than the Plaintiffs) and the Club then bought an action against the Council for breach of contract and thoughtlessness (which exit not be discussed here). The claim contended that the Council had warranted that if a tender was received in accordance with their instructions it would be punctually 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 want to wedge a panoptic essay, order it on our website: OrderEssay.net

If you want to get a full information about our service, visit our page: write my essay