If it is really important to accompany this article with a photograph, I guess we could find some pictures of stock certificates somewhere? Grant in the Environmental Law Portal of the European Encyclopedia of Law. The letter was lost in the post and he never received the acceptance. Suppose a man has paid his tailor by cheque or banknote, and posts a letter containing a cheque or banknote to his tailor, which never reaches, is the tailor paid? But there is no default in the other, and why should he be the only person to suffer? Besides, his offer may be by advertisement to all mankind. His application was accepted, and his name was added to the list of registered shareholders, However, the letter informing the appellant of this never reached him and thus Grant never paid for the shares. R 250 and Household Fire and Carriage Accident Insurance Co Ltd v Grant arising from the delay that is inevitable in delivering a letter 1 Q.
I think they are perfectly reconcilable, and that I have shewn so. On the other hand, if the contract is not finally concluded, except in the event of the acceptance actually reaching the offerer, the door would be opened to the perpetration of much fraud, and, putting aside this consideration, considerable delay in commercial transactions, in which despatch is, as a rule, of the greatest consequence, would be occasioned; for the acceptor would never be entirely safe in acting upon his acceptance until he had received notice that his letter of acceptance had reached its destination. Are they liable with that? To me it appears that in practice a contract complete upon the acceptance of an offer being posted, but liable to be put an end to by an accident in the post, would be more mischievous than a contract only binding upon the parties to it upon the acceptance actually reaching the offerer, and I can see no principle of law from which such an anomalous contract can be deduced. That is because I have a full-time job which does not involve the law, and Wikipedia is a hobby for me: i. When the company went bankrupt, the liquidator sued Mr Grant for the outstanding payments on the shares, so the question was whether Mr Grant's offer for shares had been validly accepted, and whether there was a binding contract for him to pay up. Grant in the Commercial Law Portal of the European Encyclopedia of Law. That because a man, who may send a communication by post or otherwise, sends it by post, he should bind the person addressed, though the communication never reaches him, while he would not so bind him if he had sent it by hand, is impossible.
Grant in the Employment and Labour Portal of the European Encyclopedia of Law. Mr Grant applied for shares in the Household Fire and Carriage Accident Insurance Company. That the present case is one of proposal and acceptance. I am at a loss to see how the post office is the agent for both parties. If, therefore, posting a letter which does not reach is a sufficient communication of acceptance of an offer, it is equally a communication of everything else which may be communicated by post, e.
But as much as I am a fan of adding photos to articles, this is not one that seems to need it. Grant Household Fire Insurance Co. Chapters: Household Fire Insurance Company V Grant, Tamplin V James, 1879 in Ireland, Wormwood Scrubs Act 1879. It contains an important dissenting judgment by , who wished to dispose of it. Grant in the Constitutional Law Portal of the European Encyclopedia of Law. The company allotted the shares to the defendant, and duly addressed to him and posted a letter containing the notice of allotment, but the letter never was received by him. For example, if you mail money to someone in an acceptance, then you have paid even if the money never reaches the other party.
Unfortunately for me, I don't presently have the time to read the case text and write a decent summary of it, which is something that would be better done by a scholar of the work anyway. There is no doubt that it is so in all cases where personal service is not required. Eventually Household Fire went into liquidation and the liquidator applied for money from the appellant. Lord Blackburn was not dealing with the question before us; there was no doubt in the case before him that the letter had reached. But as it stands it comes to this, that if an offer is to be accepted in June, and there is a month's post between the places, posting the letter on the 30th of June will suffice, though it does not reach till the 31st of July; but that case does not affect this. This article isn't about fire or firefighters.
Grant in other legal encyclopedias If you search for an entry, then decide you want to see what another legal encyclopedia says about it, you may find your entry in this section. Reasons Thesiger and Baggallay agree with the trial judge's decision that the contract was formed when the acceptance was mailed. He says the proposer may guard himself against hardship by making the proposal expressly conditioned on the arrival of the answer within a definite time. Comments on: Household Fire and Carriage Insurance Co v Grant 1879 4ex d 219 Non-delivery of the mail was immaterial By: Fiat Justitia Ruat Caelum. Historical Dictionary of International Tribunals.
Any one in the State may become a. I believe equal if not greater, will, if it does not prevail. I can only urge you to do so and hope that you or another legal-minded Wikipedian will come to agree. An offer may be withdrawn at any time before it has been unconditionally accepted : and. You should contact a lawyer licensed in your jurisdiction for advice on specific legal problems. It contains an important dissenting judgment by , who wished to dispose of it. The letter was lost in the post and he never received the acceptance.
Household Fire and Carriage Accident Insurance Company Ltd v Grant 1879 On 30 September 1874 Grant applied by a letter for 100 shares this was his offer to buy the shares in the Household Fire and Carriage Accident Insurance Company Ltd. If he trusts to the post he trusts to a means of communication which, as a rule, does not fail, and if no answer to his offer is received by him, and the matter is of importance to him, he can make inquiries of the person to whom his offer was addressed. There's nothing wrong with supplying enough detail for the article to be useful to a law student, but it's important to make it accessible to the layman as well. That as a consequence of or involved in the first proposition, if the acceptance is written or verbal, i. Meanwhile I wish to mention some elementary propositions which, if carefully borne in mind, will assist in the determination of this case: First. That a letter honestly but mistakenly written and posted must bind the writer if hours before its arrival he informed the person addressed that it was coming, but was wrong and recalled; suppose a false but honest character given, and the mistake found out after the letter posted, and notice that it was wrong given to the person addressed. Doubtless in that case he would be the person to suffer if the letter did not reach its destination.