Intro to Contract Practice eTest

Front

According to Gageler J in Stilk v Myrick, promising to do something that you have already done is not good consideration

Back

False

Front

Where a contract specifies a valid condition, McCaul (Aust) Pty Ltd v Pitt Club Ltd is authority that the contract won't come into effect until that specific event has occurred.

Back

True

Front

Select all of the following that are correct about acceptance: Williams v Carwardine is authority that someone is entitled to a reward if they have an ulterior motive to accepting the offer but have the offer in their mind at time of acceptance, Brinkiborn v Stahag is authority that the postal rule does not apply to instant forms of communication, Carter v Hyde is authority that you can accept any offer, even if it is not made to you, Harvey v Facey is authority that communication of acceptance via a 3rd party is acceptable

Back

Brinkiborn v Stahag is authority that the postal rule does not apply to instant forms of communication