You are on page 1of 2

Issue: Whether Anis should pay for the items that she has selected at Only You Mart?

Principle of Law:

In the Contract Act 1950, the word proposal brings the same meaning as the word
“offer”. Under Section 2(a) of the Contract Act, an offer is made when a person signifies to
another of his willingness to do with a view of obtaining the assent of the other person to such
act or abstinence. In Section 2(b) of Contract Act states that when the person to whom the
proposal is made signifies his assent thereto, the proposal is said to be accepted. However, there
are some statements or acts are not being called as proposal. It is called as Invitation to Treat
(ITT). The reason why is because the that acceptance of this ITT does not create an agreement.
ITT is sort of preliminary communication, which passes between the parties at the stage of
negotiation. For example, price list, advertisement, display of goods and tender. Display of goods
in a shop is only considered as invitation to treat as been stated in the case of Pharmaceutical
Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemist Ltd [1953]. For the current situation, there’s
an display of goods.

Application of Law:

There’s an Invitation to Treat (ITT) in this situation which are display of personal goods.
It is because Only You Mart is involved in displaying the personal goods. This would make it as
an invitation to Anis to make an offer. Referring to the case of Pharmaceutical Society of
Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemist Ltd [1953], Anis has made an offer to Only You Mary
when she has selected the goods from the shelf. There is an acceptance according to Section 2(b)
that should be done by Only You Mart when they received a payment from Anis. However, in
this situation, there is no payment that has been made by Anis. Thus, there is no acceptance
made. Therefore, there is mo valid contract was formed between Anis and Only You Mart.

Conclusion:
In conclusion, Anis had the right not to pay for the items that she has selected at Only
You Mart because there is no valid contract between them.

You might also like