Adams v Lindsell (1818) 1 B & Ald 681, 106 ER 250 (KB)
On 2 September, the defendants wrote to the plaintiffs offering to sell them wool, requiring that they send their answer by post. The defendants misdirected this letter, so that the plaintiffs did not receive it until 5 September. The plaintiffs posted their acceptance on the same day, but it was not received until 9 September. Meanwhile, on 8 September, the defendants, not having received an answer by 7 September as they had expected, sold the wool to someone else.
Held: There was a contract on 5 September when the plaintiffs posted their acceptance. In
answer to the argument that the acceptance had to be communicated, the court said that if that
were so, no contract could ever be completed by post.
If the defendants were not bound by their offer when accepted by the plaintiffs until the answer was received, then the plaintiffs ought not to be bound until after they had received the notification that the defendants had received their answer and assented to it, and so it might go on ad infinitum.
The court stressed the fact that the delay in notifying the acceptance was solely the result of the defendants’ mistake and ‘it therefore must be taken as against them, that the plaintiffs’ answer was received in course of post’.
