Evans'
agent wrote to the Livingstone and offered to sell some land in Canada.
Livingstone wired the Evans' agent and said he'd take it at a lower
price.Evans' agent wired
back and said he couldn't lower the price.At the same time, the Evans sold the land to someone
else.Then Livingstone wired
to accept the offer, but to no avail.Livingstone sued for specific performance.
Livingstone
argued that Evan's original offer was never terminated, and only the
counteroffer was rejected.
Evans
argued that the counteroffer and the original offer were terminated and
rejected, consecutively.
Hyde
v. Wrench established the principle
that the making of a counteroffer is a rejection of the original offer.
The
Canadian Court found that a binding contract was formed.
The
Court found that if Evans' agent hadn't sent the message about not being
able to lower the price, there would be no question that there was no
contract because the counteroffer was a rejection of the original offer.
However,
the Court found (narrowly) that the message from the Evans' agent was not
merely a rejection of the counteroffer but also a renewal of the original
offer.In that case, as far
as Livingstone knew, the offer was still open when he accepted at the
original price.
A
counteroffer acts as a rejection of the original offer.A rejection of the counteroffer
may act as a renewal of the original offer.
An
inquiry is not a
counteroffer.But you have
to be specific in your wording or it could be interpreted as a
counteroffer.
br>
