92.30.143.24: Removed comma for accuracy

2025-03-13T14:31:44Z

Removed comma for accuracy

New page

{{short description|Scottish contract case law}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=April 2022}}
'''Wolf and Wolf v Forfar Potato Co''' (1984 S.L.T. 100) is a [[Landmark decision|leading case]] in Scots [[Contract|contract law]]. It deals with [[offer and acceptance]], more specifically with the effects a counter offer has on the existence of a contract.<ref name="lexisnexis">{{cite book| title=Scots Law - A Student Guide | publisher=Butterworths | year=2003|isbn=0-406-95732-0|pages=88}}</ref><ref>{{cite web| accessdate = 2009-11-23|title=STEPHEN ANTHONY TENBEY v. STOLT COMEX SEAWAY LTD+MACGREGOR ENERGY SERVICES LTD, 14 February 2001, Lord Osborne |url = http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/opinions/OSB0602.html}}</ref><ref>{{cite web| accessdate = 2009-11-23|last=Rennie|first=Robert|publisher=Law Society of Scotland| title=How much law, anyway? |url = http://www.journalonline.co.uk/Magazine/49-8/1000147.aspx}}</ref>

The case itself concerns the possible sale of [[potato]]es by a [[Forfar]] potato merchant to an international potato merchant in [[Amsterdam]], on 29 November 1977. The Forfar merchant [[telex]]ed an offer (open for acceptance till 17.00 hrs., 30 November 1977) to sell potatoes to the international merchant, subject to certain conditions regarding delivery dates and sizes. By telex dated 30 November 1977, the international merchant purported to accept the offer, subject to certain additional conditions. Following a telephone conversation between the parties to clarify the position, the international merchant by further telex dated 30 November 1977, sent within the time-limit, again purported to accept the original offer but requested that their conditions telexed in their first telex should be given consideration. The Forfar merchant did not supply the potatoes and was sued for damages. The question arose as to whether there was a valid contract with consensus in idem ever constituted between the parties.

The sheriff after a proof before answer, held that
#there was no contract between the parties, and
#the pursuers failed to prove any loss.

The pursuers appealed to the [[Court of Session]] where it was held that on the making of a qualified acceptance and counter-offer, the original offer falls and that on the failure to obtain the terms requested in the counter-offer, the party cannot fall back on and accept the original offer.<ref name="lexisnexis" />

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:United Kingdom contract case law]]
[[Category:1984 in Scotland]]
[[Category:Court of Session cases]]
[[Category:1984 in United Kingdom case law]]

{{Scotland-law-stub}}

Wolf v Forfar Potato Co - Revision history

92.30.143.24: Removed comma for accuracy