BetterLawNotes-5 (2)


Alternatively, the offer may lapse before it has been accepted. The offeror may state explicitly the period during which the offer remains open for acceptance. A purported acceptance after this time will be ineffective. Where there is no express limit on the time for acceptance, it is generally thought that the offer must be accepted within a reasonable time for a contract to be formed.

Ramsgate Victoria Hotel Company Limited v Montefiore (1866) LR 1 Ex 109

D applied in June in writing to the C company for an allotment of shares in the company. The shares were allotted to D in November but by this time D no longer wanted them. The Court of Exchequer held that the allotment had not been made within a reasonable time of D’s application and that accordingly D was not bound to take the shares.

In Manchester Diocesan Council of Education v Commercial and General Investments Ltd [1970] 1 WLR 241, 247 Buckley LJ gave two possible explanations for this rule:

‘First, it may be said that by implication the offer is made upon terms that, if it is not accepted within a reasonable time, it must be treated as withdrawn. Alternatively, it may be said that, if the offeree does not accept the offer within a reasonable time, he must be treated as having refused it. On either view the offer would cease to be a live one upon the expiration of what, in the circumstances of the particular case, should be regarded as a reasonable time for acceptance. The first of these alternatives involves implying a term that if the offer is not accepted within a reasonable time, it shall be treated as withdrawn or lapsing at the end of that period, if it has not then been accepted: the second is based upon an inference to be drawn from the conduct of the offeree, that is, that having failed to accept the offer within a reasonable time he has manifested an intention to refuse it.’

Buckley LJ said that he preferred the second explanation as it introduced less uncertainty than the first.

You cannot copy content of this page