Acceptance - Law of Contract

• Conversely an offer made to the general public can be established through anybody who fulfil that performs then the conditions stated therein. So however Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. - whether as Mrs Carlill was held for have accepted the offer but it had not been made to her personally.
• Therefore an offer made to a class of persons can be established only through a person of that class: as Wood v. Lectrik Ltd. - whether there an offer to "hair sufferers" that was held to have been properly accepted through Mr. Wood - a young man that whose hair was prematurely turning grey and then was regarded through the court as a "hair sufferer" during the terms of the offer.
• However an offer made to a particular person can be acknowledged only through the particular person: as Boulton v. Jones - whether there it was held that an offer made through Jones to Brocklehurst could not be received through Boulton.
• However the acceptance of an offer be obliged to be unconditional:as Hyde v. Wrench -whether there it was held such the "acceptance" to buy the house on £950 destroyed the offer to sell such the house with £1,000. Neale v Merrett. However offer terminated through a counter - offer cannot be invigorated through a subsequent tender of performance thereof.
• Conversely an acceptance of an offer communicated for the offeror verbally with the offeree is effective from moment the offeror hears the offeree's words:as Entores Ltd. V. Miles Far East Corporation like obiter dictum through Lord Denning)
• Whether the offeror and the offeree negotiate with telephone the acceptance is complete the moment for the offeror hears the offeree's words of acceptance: like Entores Ltd. V. Miles Far East Corporation (obiter dictum through Lord Denning).
• Whether the offeror and the offeree negotiate with telex the acceptance will be effective beginning the instant that the telex message is received with the offeror: Entores Ltd. V. Miles Far East Corporation - whereas it was held that the contract was formed in the London whereas the offeror received the telex message from the Amsterdam.
• Whether as the offeror expressly or impliedly authorised offeree for transmit his acceptance with post the acceptance will be effective on the moment the letter about acceptance is posted: as Byrne v. Van Tien Hoven - whenever it was held that the acceptance was effective whether the plaintiffs posted their letter on date October 11th in the New York but the defendants in Cardiff were not attentive of the posting.