英国合同法判例选.docVIP

  1. 1、原创力文档(book118)网站文档一经付费(服务费),不意味着购买了该文档的版权,仅供个人/单位学习、研究之用,不得用于商业用途,未经授权,严禁复制、发行、汇编、翻译或者网络传播等,侵权必究。。
  2. 2、本站所有内容均由合作方或网友上传,本站不对文档的完整性、权威性及其观点立场正确性做任何保证或承诺!文档内容仅供研究参考,付费前请自行鉴别。如您付费,意味着您自己接受本站规则且自行承担风险,本站不退款、不进行额外附加服务;查看《如何避免下载的几个坑》。如果您已付费下载过本站文档,您可以点击 这里二次下载
  3. 3、如文档侵犯商业秘密、侵犯著作权、侵犯人身权等,请点击“版权申诉”(推荐),也可以打举报电话:400-050-0827(电话支持时间:9:00-18:30)。
  4. 4、该文档为VIP文档,如果想要下载,成为VIP会员后,下载免费。
  5. 5、成为VIP后,下载本文档将扣除1次下载权益。下载后,不支持退款、换文档。如有疑问请联系我们
  6. 6、成为VIP后,您将拥有八大权益,权益包括:VIP文档下载权益、阅读免打扰、文档格式转换、高级专利检索、专属身份标志、高级客服、多端互通、版权登记。
  7. 7、VIP文档为合作方或网友上传,每下载1次, 网站将根据用户上传文档的质量评分、类型等,对文档贡献者给予高额补贴、流量扶持。如果你也想贡献VIP文档。上传文档
查看更多
英国合同法判例选

Cases of Law of Contract: 1.1 Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists [1953] ???????? The defendant’s branch at Edgeware was adapted to a self-service system whereby ???????? customers selected goods from the shelves and took them to a cash desk to pay the price. ???????? One section of the shelves was set out with drugs included in the poisons list referred to ???????? in s.17 of the Pharmacy and Poisons Act 1933, though they were not dangerous drugs and ???????? did not require a doctor’s prescription. Section 18 of that Act required the sale of such ???????? drugs to take place in the presence of a pharmacist. All sales of drugs on the poisons list ???????? were supervised at the cash desk by a pharmacist. The Society, which had a duty to ???????? enforce the Act, brought an action against Boots on the basis that the display of the drugs ???????? constituted an offer, which the customer accepted when he selected goods from the ???????? shelves. The sale was thus completed without supervision. ???????? Held: The display of drugs on the shelves was not an offer but an invitation to treat. The ???????? contract was made when the assistant at the cash desk accepted the customer’s offer to ???????? buy what had been chosen. The presence of the pharmacist at the cash desk fulfilled the ???????? requirements for supervision under the Act. 1.2 Harvey v Facey [1893] ???????? Harvey sent a telegram to Facey: “Will you sell Bumper Hall Pen, telegraph lowest cash ???????? price.” Facey replied with a telegram: “Lowest cash price Bumper Hall Pen £900.” Harvey ???????? purported to accept this offer but Facey did not respond. Harvey sued. ???????? Held: There was no contract. Facey’s telegram was not an offer but a reply to an inquiry. ? ?1.3 Carlill v Carbolic Smokeball Co [1893] ????????? Defendants were proprietors of a medical preparation called “The Carbolic Smoke Ball”. ???????? They advertised in a number of newspapers that t

文档评论(0)

zhuwenmeijiale + 关注
实名认证
文档贡献者

该用户很懒,什么也没介绍

版权声明书
用户编号:7065136142000003

1亿VIP精品文档

相关文档