The Facts of the Gibson Case in Manchester - Essay Example

Consequently, Mr Gibson applied to be sufficed with the details of his house, which included the house price and the mortgage terms. This form was replied to by the treasurer of the council in February 1971on how the purchase of the mortgage could be implemented. Mr Gibson went ahead and filled the required form except for the purchase price and returned it in March 1971.

The Labour party took power and halted the sales of the houses. This decision made Mr Gibson sue the respondents claiming a breach of a binding contract. The county court and the court of appeal ruled in his favour, but this was appealed to the House of Lords, quashing the earlier decision. The legal principle that was the basis of dispute disputes resulted from distinguishing between an offer and an invitation to treat. Notably, it should be comprehended that an offer is an expression of the desire to contract on various conditions upon acceptance, while mere negotiations to enter into a given contract are not offers but invitations to treat.

The decision in the county court, the court of appeal and the House of LordsThe county court and the court of appeal made a similar decision. The court of appeal, Lord Denning, held that there was an enforceable contract. However, Geoffrey Lane LJ, a court of appeal judge, dissented and held there was no enforceable contract. The House of Lords unanimously allowed the appeal and decided that there was no binding contract between the two parties. Explanation of the approach to the legal principle by the court of appeal and the House of LordsThe principle behind the decision of the court of appeal was affirmed by Lord Denning.

The honourable judge emphasized that their conduct should also establish communication between the parties. Their conduct had supposed a binding contract between them, which led to the parties coming into an agreement. The House of Lords had a unanimous approach in this case. The court affirmed that there was never an offer by the council available to be accepted or rejected. Therefore, if there was no offer in the first place then, a binding contract was not realized between the two parties.