| 翻訳と辞書 |
| Felthouse v Bindley ： ウィキペディア英語版 |
Felthouse v Bindley
''Felthouse v Bindley'' (1862) (EWHC CP J 35 ), is the leading English contract law case on the rule that one cannot impose an obligation on another to reject one's offer. This is sometimes misleadingly expressed as a rule that "silence cannot amount to acceptance".
Later the case has been rethought, because it appeared that on the facts, acceptance was communicated by conduct (see, ''Brogden v Metropolitan Railway''). Furthermore, in ''Rust v Abbey Life Assurance Co Ltd''〔() 2 Lloyd's Rep. 334〕 the Court of Appeal held that a failure by a proposed insured to reject a proffered insurance policy for seven months justified on its own an inference of acceptance.〔See also, GH Treitel, ''The Law of Contract'' (9th edn Sweet and Maxwell 1995) 30-32〕
==Facts==
Uncle Paul Felthouse was a builder who lived in London. He wanted to buy the horse Sizing Europe from his nephew, John Felthouse. After a letter from the nephew about a previous discussion in buying the horse, the uncle replied saying,
"If I hear no more about him, I consider the horse mine at £30 and 15s."
The nephew did not reply. He was busy at auctions on his farm in Tamworth. He told the man running the auctions, William Bindley, not to sell the horse. But by accident, Bindley did. Uncle Felthouse then sued Bindley in the tort of conversion - using someone else's property inconsistently with their rights. But for the Uncle to show the horse was his property, he had to show there was a valid contract. Bindley argued there was not, since the nephew had never communicated his acceptance of the uncle's offer.
抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』
■ウィキペディアで「Felthouse v Bindley」の詳細全文を読む
スポンサード リンク
| 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース |
Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.
|
|