Butler
Machine Tool Ltd. V Ex-cell-O Corp Ltd
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
Facts:
Sellers offered to sell a machine tool to buyers for a price, with
delivery in ten mths. This offer includes a price variation clause.
Buyers replied on their own standard form accepting the offer, but
terms and conditions in this form made no provision for a price
variation clause. Buyer’s standard form had a tear off strip which
sellers returned containing “we accept you order on the terms and
conditions thereon”. Sellers returned slip with letter stating the
buyer’s order was entered into in accordance with the original
offer. Sellers eventually delivered machine, claiming an extra price
under price variation clause. Buyers refuse to pay.
Issue:
Which form prevails over the other?
Rule:
the returning of the form’s slip resembles an acceptance of a
counteroffer , the attached letter is simply a confirmation of the
price and description of the machine.
Analysis:
since the form that the sellers returned to the buyers agreed to the
terms and conditions of the buyers, their signature is equivalent to
an acceptance of the buyers counter offer, therefore there is no room
for arguments as to whether or not there is a price variation clause.
Conclusion:
The difference in the cost for the price variation clause was not an
action that could be carried out.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
No comments:
Post a Comment