ABSTRACT

In a number of stock situations, the courts appear to have adopted prima facie presumptions which, although capable of being displaced by clear contrary intention, lay down the general approach of the law. The contrast here is usually said to be between ‘offers’ and ‘invitations to treat’ (invitations to offers to negotiate or make offers in their turn and so incapable of acceptance in themselves). The four most widely accepted examples of this are: displays of goods in stores; advertisements; auction sales; and invitations to tender.