Cour de Cassation — Contract Law — Formation: Offer and acceptance
| Date | Citation | Note |
|---|---|---|
| 24.05.2005 | Bull.civ. 2005.I. no. 223, p. 189 First Civil Chamber, (pourvoi no. 02-15.188) Subsequent developments |
Although silence does not count as acceptance on its own, this is not the case when the circumstances allow the silence to be invested with the meaning of an acceptance. |
| 07.01.1981 | Bull. civ. IV, n° 14 Case Société l’Aigle v. Société Comase Subsequent developments |
A contract which was not to come into force unless the acceptor had signed it by a certain date did come into force on the timely despatch by the acceptor of a letter stating that it had been signed; it was irrelevant that the offeror never received it. |
| 01.12.1969 | D. 1970, 422 Case Martin v. Sandrock Subsequent developments |
An offeree is presumed to have accepted an offer which is exclusively in his own interests: a volunteer who was injured while putting out a fire in a burning vehicle therefore sue the silent owner under a “contract of assistance”. |
| 21.03.1932 | D.P. 1933, I, 65 Case Cie d’assurances Le Lloyd de France v. F. | For the purposes of venue under the Code of Civil Procedure, the place where a contract is formed is the place where the acceptance was despatched, or where the services were to be performed, or where any payment was to be actually received. |
| 01.12.1885 | S. 1887, I, 167 Case Cibiel v. Dieulafoy Subsequent developments |
Where parties have agreed on the thing to be sold and the price, both parties are bound unless there is unresolved disagreement as to the mode of payment, rebuttably presumed to be immediately due in cash, unless delivery is to be delayed. |
| 25.05.1870 | D.P. 1870, I, 257 Case Guilloux v. Société des raffineries nantaises Subsequent developments |
A party is not bound by an obligation simply for failure to reply to a letter stating that he is so bound. |