Offer and Acceptance
... For the agreement to be legally binding it must consist of an offer and acceptance. “An offer is where a person expresses unequivocally to another his willingness to make a binding agreement on the terms specified by him”. An offer is a promise to be bound on particular terms; it must be capable of acceptance. ... An invitation to treat is merely a proposition to enter into further negotiations, and as such cannot be deemed as concrete offer to sell. As in Fisher v Bell (1961) where the court held that the shopkeepers display of a flick-knife in the window was not an offer to sell but merely an invitation to treat. ... The court held that the advertisement was not an actual offer to sell and amounted to nothing more than an invitation to treat. ... In Carllil v Carbolic Smokeball Co (1893), one of arguments the defendants used was that their advertisement was too vague to constitute an offer. However the court held that the details in the advertisement were sufficiently definite, and the contents of the advertisement were deemed to be specific and exact in their intent, thereby making it an offer open to acceptance. ... It is safe to assume then, that Lars’ fax can be interpreted as a clear offer to sell as opposed to a mere invitation to treat. Now that it has been established that a valid offer exists, it is necessary to consider whether an acceptance has been made.