Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 40 views

    Postal Rule

    Uploaded by

    Ghazaal Khan
    The document discusses the postal rule of acceptance in contract law and whether it remains relevant in the modern era. Specifically, it provides: 1) An overview of the traditional postal rule established in cases like Adams v. Lindsell, which held that acceptance is effective upon posting rather than receipt. 2) Analysis of how the postal rule applies to different modern communication methods like courier, email, and fax, noting issues like delays or technical problems. 3) The conclusion that applying the postal rule to modern communication may be too risky given increased reliability and speed, though some methods like courier may still warrant its application.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Postal Rule

    Uploaded by

    Ghazaal Khan
    40 views6 pages
    The document discusses the postal rule of acceptance in contract law and whether it remains relevant in the modern era. Specifically, it provides: 1) An overview of the traditional postal rule established in cases like Adams v. Lindsell, which held that acceptance is effective upon posting rather than receipt. 2) Analysis of how the postal rule applies to different modern communication methods like courier, email, and fax, noting issues like delays or technical problems. 3) The conclusion that applying the postal rule to modern communication may be too risky given increased reliability and speed, though some methods like courier may still warrant its application.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    Postal_Rule.docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document discusses the postal rule of acceptance in contract law and whether it remains relevant in the modern era. Specifically, it provides: 1) An overview of the traditional postal rule established in cases like Adams v. Lindsell, which held that acceptance is effective upon posting rather than receipt. 2) Analysis of how the postal rule applies to different modern communication methods like courier, email, and fax, noting issues like delays or technical problems. 3) The conclusion that applying the postal rule to modern communication may be too risky given increased reliability and speed, though some methods like courier may still warrant its application.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    40 views6 pages

    Postal Rule

    Uploaded by

    Ghazaal Khan
    The document discusses the postal rule of acceptance in contract law and whether it remains relevant in the modern era. Specifically, it provides: 1) An overview of the traditional postal rule established in cases like Adams v. Lindsell, which held that acceptance is effective upon posting rather than receipt. 2) Analysis of how the postal rule applies to different modern communication methods like courier, email, and fax, noting issues like delays or technical problems. 3) The conclusion that applying the postal rule to modern communication may be too risky given increased reliability and speed, though some methods like courier may still warrant its application.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 6

    Postal Rule

    U.K DEGREE TRANSFER PROGRAMME (LAW)

    JULY’10

    Name | Alexander Richmond Bin MindiongDouglas Lim Teng YangYang


    Xi |

    Student I.D | |

    Submission Date | 20th Sept 2010 |

    Words Count | 1732 Words |

    Subject Code | DL2(Law of Contract) |

    Assignment Question:

    You are requested to write an assignment on the 'Rationale & relevance


    of the postal rule of acceptance in the 21st century' by analyzing the
    possibility of acceptance by post according to the current practice.

    (You can supply your reasoning for the rule, cite the relevant case laws,
    search for articles written on this & conclude with your opinion as to
    whether it need to be abolished or not & why?)

    CONTENT

    | | Pages |

    | Questions | 2 |

    II | Content | 3 |

    III | Introduction | 4-5 |

    IV | Traditional View | 5-6 |

    V | Modern View | 6-8 |

    VI | Conclusion | 8-9 |
    VII | Bibliography | 10 |

    Introduction of Postal Rule

    To form a contract, it usually requires offer and acceptance. Acceptance


    is an expression by words or conduct of assent to the terms of the offer.
    It shall be clear, unequivocal and unconditional as prescribed by the
    offeror. It is a moment when contract exist (that there is consensus ad
    idem). The general rule of acceptance is been stated in the case of
    Entores Ltd v Miles Far East Corporation, Lord Denning claims that an
    acceptance does not usually valid until it is reached to the knowledge of
    the offeror. This principal also applies to others modes of
    communications which are (a) Instantaneous means of communication,
    (b) Postal rule and (c) Others mode of communication.

    However, the postal rule is an exception towards general rule for the
    acceptance. The traditional postal rule stated that the acceptance is
    valid once it is posted rather than it reaches the knowledge of the
    offeror. The main reason for this rule is historical, since it dates from a
    time when a communication through the post was even slower and less
    reliable than today. This traditional view actually leads to TWO (2) major
    problems:

    (i) There is a delay between the time it is posted which depending to the
    distance; and

    (ii) There is a small risk due to difficulties of the address may leads to
    further delay or not reached at all .

    The age of the earth is around 4600 million years; however it is only 1.8
    million years since the evolution of Homo sapiens. We have been gone
    through Stone Age, Bronze Age, Iron Age and currently in the “Silicon
    Age”. Apparently the world is entering a Hi-Tech and modern era. In this
    era, the mode of communication can take many forms: face to face
    conversations, online business conference, telephone, letters, faxes, or
    email. A question arises here, as the coming of the next stage of human
    development, does the postal rules still remains its traditional view?
    Does the postal rule apply to the modern era communication such as
    email, courier and others? If yes, how to solve the major problems? If
    no, what should be the rule of acceptance for the modern era?

    Traditional view of Postal Rule


    The communication by post may be leads a delay between the sending
    of an acceptance and reach the knowledge of the offeror. The postal rule
    origin in the case of Adam v Lindsell, the court held that to require a
    posted acceptance to arrive at its destination before it could be effective
    would be impractical and inefficient. This is due to the offeree would not
    be able to do anything or take any action on the contract until the offeror
    receive the acceptance. The court felt that this might resulting an ad
    infinitum situation and do not help in promote business. Things go a bit
    differently because the postal rule do not only apply to the post but also
    apply to other non-instantaneous mode of communication.

    In the case of Cowan v O’Connor, the postal rule also applies to


    telegram. It is held that once the telegram is placed in the Post Office,
    the validity of the acceptance comes immediately. Nowadays, there is no
    more telegram service; however, postal rule binds to the telemessage
    service which replaces the telegram service.

    The application of the postal rule was differ from cases to cases. In the
    case of Henthorn v Fraser, the postal rule was applied due to the offeree
    and offeror are based on different towns. The court felt that despite of
    handed over in person, postal acceptance is much more reasonable.

    Telex service was normally an instantaneous mode of communication. In


    the case of Entores v Miles Far East Corporation, The House of Lords
    has held that the acceptance only valid until it receive by the plaintiff
    which is the offeror. This approach also binds in the case of Brinkibon v
    Stahag Stahl GmbH. This is because the telex machine has almost
    immediately received and printed out, which if do not reach the
    knowledge of the other party, the sender of the telex will need to try
    again. However, in the both cases, the House of Lords do come with
    such judgment due to the telex was sent and received in the normal
    working hours. In the Brinkibon case, the House of Lords said that if the
    telex message was sent outside working hours, it would not be
    considered as an instantaneous. Therefore, to determined the
    application of postal rule through mode of communication is said to be
    impossible.

    Modern era of communication.

    From the traditional views of postal rule, it is hardly to determine whether


    the postal rule does remain its traditional view. This is because in the
    silicon age, the speed determines everything. This perfectly fits the
    approach of the postal rule whereas the contract is formed when the
    acceptance is posted. To discuss this, we have seek toward three
    modern mode of communication which are:

    A. Courier Service

    Courier is one of the modern modes of communication. Courier service


    provides a delivery and logistic service to both domestic and
    international. This included delivering an offer, acceptance, or legal
    document. Courier services provide a service which is faster than postal
    service. However, courier service is much more secure is compare to the
    mailing service. This is because the courier slip is the contract between
    the sender and the courier. However in the case of Re London and
    Northern Bank, the court held that the acceptance must be post
    properly. What occurs here is the letter of acceptance only handed to a
    postman whose job is only authorized to delivered mails instead of
    collecting it. This doesn’t bind courier service due to the authorities of
    the courier service do have duty to deliver and collect courier. Until
    today, the jurisdiction do not really apply postal rule to courier service,
    but it is said that the courier service is much more secure if compare to
    the mailing why postal rule should not been applied?

    B. Electronic Mailing Service

    Email, without doubt is an instantaneous mode of communication.


    However, in the Brinkibon case, the house held that if the telex message
    was sent outside working hours, it would not be considered as an
    instantaneous. Question is does same approach can be use for the
    email case? For the email, it is quite different from other instantaneous
    modes of communication. Unlike telex and phone, it does not reach the
    destination immediately. Yet, when it works properly, it occurs
    instantaneously. It cannot be said there is a delay that would cost lost to
    any other parties. In the 21st century, after the innovation of phones and
    portable computer, getting online and receiving email is said to be as
    easy as answering a phone call. Therefore, it is said to be unwise if the
    postal rule being affixed to the email service.

    C. Fax

    Fax service combines both of the technology of telex and photocopy


    machine. Therefore, it doesn’t bind itself towards the postal rule. Fax
    being categorize in the instantaneous mode of communication. Thus, the
    acceptance only come effect when it reach the knowledge of the offeror.

    Conclusion

    In this 21st century, it is said to be too outdated if the postal rule still
    being apply in the modern era mode of communication, this is because
    in nowadays, the speed determined everything and it consume less time
    if compare to past. To apply postal rule in 21st century is too risky. For
    example in the case of Household Fire Insurance v Grant, the postal
    acceptance take effect once it is posted even if it gets lost in the post
    and never reach the knowledge of the offeror. However in the courier
    service, it can be entrusted for such duty, this is because if there is an
    accident happen (except for Act of God) the courier service can be put
    the blame on.

    In email service, things can go the same, especially when sometimes


    the things go wrong, if the email lost in the middle of nowhere; if the
    email was delayed due to technical problem; these numerous “if”
    suggested that the postal rule being applied to the email. It is also
    possible that the fax service being delayed or even missing. However,
    due to the development of the technology, all this mode of
    communication shall be more and more reliable and instantaneous
    enough.

    Articles

    * Should the postal acceptance rule be applied to E-Mail? – Dave Stott

    * The silicon age? It’s just dawning – Otis Port, New York (1996)

    * New Zealand Law Commission (Report 58) - Te Aka Matua o te Ture


    (1999)

    Books

    * Elliot & Quinn Contract Law – Catherine Elliot & Frances Quinn (6th
    Edition)

    * The Modern Law of Contract – Richard Stone (8th Edition)

    * Oxford Contract Law - Mindy Chen – Wishart (2nd Edition)

    Website
    * http://www.uncitral.org/

    * http://www.duhaime.org/LegalResources/Contracts/LawArticle-89/Part-
    4-Offer-Acceptance.aspx

    --------------------------------------------

    [ 1 ]. (1955) 2 QB 327

    [ 2 ]. In 18th century a letter from London to Bath takes 3 days whereas


    it is only 115 miles apart. - High Society, Venetia Murray, ISBN:
    0670857580, p. 2.

    [ 3 ]. Household Fire Insurance Co Ltd v Grant [1879] 4 ExD 216

    [ 4 ]. The silicon age? It’s just dawning – Otis Port, New York (1996)

    [ 5 ]. [1818] 106 ER 250

    [ 6 ]. [1888] 20 QBD 640

    [ 7 ]. [1892] 2 Ch 27

    [ 8 ]. [1955] 2 QB 327

    [ 9 ]. [1983] 2 AC 34

    [ 10 ]. [1900]

    [ 11 ]. Email usually reach at the inbox (destination host) which do not


    usually so any notification.

    [ 12 ]. (1879) 4 ExD 216

    [ 13 ]. A legal term for event outside the control of human (e.g. Natural
    disaster)

    You might also like