Acceptance – Case Briefs

Livingstone v. Evans et al (landmark case)

AB Supreme Court, Trial 1925

Facts: D sends offer to sell land for $1,800. P replies with “Send lowest cash price. Will give
$1,600 cash. Wire.” D replies that they can’t reduce the price. P accepts offer of $1,800.
Issue: Was P’s reply a rejection (and thus, a termination) of the $1,800 offer?
Previous case law:
 Hyde v. Wrench (1840) – “[the counter-offer] rejected the offer previously made by the
Defendant… [can’t] revive the proposal of the Defendant, by tendering an acceptance
of it.”
 Stevenson v. McLean – distinguishes a mere inquiry, which does not contain an offer,
from a rejection of the initial offer.
 Re Cowan and Boyd – if the defendant leaves open the original offer for further
discussion, the plaintiff will have the right to accept the offer at a later date.
Decision (Walsh):
A counter offer terminates the original offer, but the Defendant’s response to the
counter offer can revive the original offer or intimate that D is still willing to treat on
the basis of the original offer (ie: “Cannot reduce price”).

United Pacific Capital Ltd. v. Piché (considers Livingstone)

BC Supreme Court, 2004

Facts: There was an offer of settlement outlined in Minutes of Settlement, where there was
confusion/disagreement over one term. Piche’s lawyer was asked to clarify in a letter.
Piche decided to go to trial, his solicitor made a phone call saying the letters would not
be sent. Dunne signed the Minutes of Settlement that outlined the offer.
Issue: Was the offer still capable of acceptance? Yes.
Previous case law:
 Hyde v. Wrench (1840) – a counteroffer amounts to a rejection of the original offer. If
the counteroffer isn’t accepted, and the original offer isn’t re-made, the original offer is
not open for acceptance.
o Supported by Sinanan v. Woodyer (1999), Scanlon v. Standish (2002).
 Cowan and Boyd (1921) – if the defendant leaves open the original offer for further
discussion, the plaintiff will have the right to accept the offer at a later date. Also stands
for the ratio that an expression of disappointment does not amount to a rejection of the
original offer. .
Decision (Groberman):
Dunne’s statement that he would not accept the offer without an “exit strategy” in
place, is a rejection. Pursuant to Livingstone v. Evans, further discussions can revive
the original offer, thus the offer was capable of being accepted.