ABSTRACT
In the last chapter, we looked at the expectation that a contract is only formed when there is a valid offerwhich ismetwith an acceptance of that offer. Collins (2003) refers to thismarrying of offer and acceptance as the ‘moment of responsibility’. Themain focus of case law in this area has been on finding away of determiningwhen it is appropriate to attach legal liability to statements or the conduct of the negotiating parties. It was made clear in the last chapter that the idea that there are ruleswhich allowus to identify an ‘offer’ and ‘acceptance’ is an artificial one. Despite the tendency to aspire to clear, if somewhat illogical, rules, in practice it is often difficult for the judiciary to separate the two concepts of offer and acceptance out. Negotiations leading up to a contract are often messier than some textbooks would have us think. In this chapter we will turn to some of the key concepts that have been used by the judiciary in an attempt to organise cases according to a coherent set of principles. In the chapter that follows we will turn to look at some of the difficulties which have arisen in using traditional concepts of offer and acceptance in the complex world of business.
