The House considered whether a written contract had been created in correspondence.
Held: Lord Hathersley said: ‘It has been established for far too long a time, and by some precedents in your Lordships’ House, that if you can find the true and important ingredients of an agreement in that which has taken place between two parties in the course of a correspondence, then, although the correspondence may not set forth, in a form which a solicitor would adopt if he were instructed to draw an agreement in writing, that which is the agreement between the parties, yet, if the parties to the agreement, the thing to be sold, a price to be paid, and all those matters, be clearly and distinctly stated, although only by letter, an acceptance clearly by letter will not the less constitute an agreement in the full sense between the parties, merely because that letter may say, ‘We will have this agreement put into due form by a solicitor.’
Lord O’Hagan said: ‘I think that the contract was complete. Everything essential to the completion of it appears on the written documents – the parties, the premises, the conditions, and the price. An offer is made; those who had full power to accept it, did accept it in terms.’
Lord Hatherley
[1878] HL 1125
England and Wales
Contract
Leading Case
Updated: 10 November 2021; Ref: scu.252314
