Glasbrook Vs Glamorgan County Council: Contractual Obligations And Consideration

The Essential Elements of a Contract

Discuss about the Glasbrook vs Glamorgan County Council.

The issue of the liability of the La Trobe University to pay to the police officials in the present situation has arisen. The powers of the police consist of the prevention, detection and also the investigation of the crime. Also, the protection of the persons is one of the most important roles that the police officials play. [1] The police officials are under no duty to protect the civilians beyond the reasonable circumstances. Therefore for any additional services they have to be paid extra incentives.

 The three essential elements of a contract being offer and acceptance, intention to be bound and consideration have to be fulfilled in order to form a contract. Consideration refers to something that holds a value.  If a promise has been made and when a person under that promise is bound to perform a particular obligation then that is not a good consideration as held in Collins vs. Godfrey,[2].[3] However, if a promise has been made to fulfill a particular obligation and then the person who is under the obligation performs more than what he is supposed to do under the terms of the general law then this is a good consideration as held by the Lords in Glasbrook Brothers Limited V. Glamorgan County Council,.[4] In the present case the police officers had to pay some extra services for which they could charge additional payment as it held a good consideration.[5]

The contractual obligations cannot be performed without consent of the parties. In the case Charcknock vs. Liverpool Corporation,[6], it was held that an implied consent given by a person tan-mounts to his acceptance to the performance of the contract.[7] In the present case also the implied consent[8] as given by the University as the authorities had expressly mentioned that extra payment would have to be paid in case extra services would be granted.

In a landmark case, Glasbrook Brothers Limited V. Glamorgan County Council,[9]it was established that the duty of the police officials to render peace and provide protection to the people has certain limits. If the police officers have performed or rendered some additional special services in lieu of their pre-existing duty then the additional payment would have to be paid to them.[10]  This case has the same facts as the situation given in the present case; therefore the police officers would be paid as they gave special services at the ball on the request of the University. This case was cited in various other cases having similar facts and situations. In a case, Harris V Sheffield United Football Club Ltd,[11] , it was held that the provision of the police officers to be present on the grounds during the football season constituted as special police services and therefore they would be entitled to extra payment. [12]

A Legally Binding Contract Has Not Been Formed

Therefore, in the present case, also Seargent Ratty had expressly mentioned that the police would charge for the extra services at the ball. The Vice Chancellor could at that time refuse to contract and apply for the additional services. However, he gave an implied consent to the services which have been given by the police officers. The police officials are under no obligation to provide protection or additional services to the people against their basic public duty. They cannot be held responsible for not providing the same. Therefore, the La Trobe University would have to pay the police officials the amount they claimed.

The issue in the present case involves the question whether a binding and a valid contract has come into existence or not. A contract is an agreement that is enforceable by law and it is legally binding on the parties. There are various essential elements of a contract. As stated by various authors and jurists such as William Anson[13] and Salmond[14] who believed that a contract is a kind of an agreement that is entered into by two parties where the rights are acquired by one of the parties and the forbearance is caused to the other party. Three essential elements of a contract are-

• Offer and acceptance
• Intention to be bound in case of any acceptance
• Consideration

The first element is that, there must be an offer and acceptance. A contract is formed only when an offer is made by one party and then accepted by the other. However there must be definiteness in the offer. It means that the offeror should have an intention or the willingness to form a contract. An offer does not have to be made to a specific person.[15] It can be made to anyone. In the case, Harvey vs. Facey,[16] it was held that if an offer is made then the intention to be bound must be shown by the offeror. If there is no intention to be bound this does not tan amount to an offer. In the present case there was no intention to be bound and therefore there was no offer made.[17] Also, as per the postal rule[18], which applies to the present case as the communication is being undertaken through post, the acceptance has to be made in accordance with placing reliance on the offer made. This rule under Australian law that the acceptance has to be made in lieu of the reliance on the offer made was held in the case R v Clarke, [19]

References

A contract comes into existence only when there is a mutual consent of the parties entering into it. Both the parties must hold an intention to enter into a contract. As per the decision of the House of Lords in the case, Brogden v. Metropolitan Railway,[20] it was proved that there must be a consensus between the two parties to form a contract. This intention could be discovered between the parties through the letters etc.[21]  In the present case, there was no consensus between the parties as no offer was made. Consensus ad idem refers to the meeting of the minds. There must be a common understanding between the parties.

Consideration refers to the price that is paid by one party to another in lieu of the promise made.[22] The price should be something that holds a value. It does not necessarily have to be paid monetarily. This is one of the most important elements of a contract. There was no presence of consideration in the present case and therefore this essential element could not be fulfilled. Thus the absence of all the essential elements of a contract proves the fact there no contract had come into existence.

In the present case, the telegram that was sent by Mr. Welwisha could not be stated as an offer as it was a mere communication on his part and therefore it was just a piece of information. No intention to be bound could be shown from the facts of the present case. Also, there was no presence of acceptance by placing reliance on the offer made. As the acceptance that was made by Dowell was against the piece of information that was sent to him, therefore in lieu of the postal rule it could not be accepted as acceptance. Hence, no consensus ad idem was made.  Also the third most essential element that is consideration is absent in the present case.

References

Australian contract law, Glasbrook v Glamorgan County Council [1925] AC 270 (2010), < https://www.australiancontractlaw.com/cases/glasbrook.html >.

E-lawresources, Collins v Godefrey (1831) 1 B & Ad 950 King's Bench Division (2016),< https://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/Collins-v-Godefrey.php>.

e-lawresources, Contractual agreement - offer and acceptance(2016),< https://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/Offer-and-acceptance.php>.

Glasbrook Brothers Limited V. Glamorgan County Council, [1925] AC 270

Hugh Collins, The Law of Contract(Cambridge University Press,2003)130

J Beatson,’ Anson’s Law of Contract’(2003) 7(2) Journal of South Pacific Law

Jonathan Reuvid and Jim Sherlock, International Trade: An Essential Guide to the Principles and Practice of Export(Kogan Page Publishers,2011)118

Laws of business, What is a Contract (2013),< https://www.lawsofbusiness.com/2013/04/what-is-contract.html>.

MHCC Mental Health Rights Manual, Chapter 6 Section B: Role and powers of the police (2015),< https://mhrm.mhcc.org.au/chapter-6/6b.aspx>.

Networked Knowledge, Consideration - in Acceptance of Contract (2017), <https://netk.net.au/Contract/04Consideration.asp>.

Networked Knowledge, Contract Law Lecture - Formation of Contract - Offer and Acceptance (2016), <https://netk.net.au/Contract/02Formation.asp>.

Swarb, Brogden V Metropolitan Railway Co: Hl 1877 (29 August 2016), < https://swarb.co.uk/brogden-v-metropolitan-railway-co-hl-1877/ >.

Swarb, Charnock V. Liverpool Corporation And Kirbys (Commercial) Ltd: Ca 1968(2 August 2016),< https://swarb.co.uk/charnock-v-liverpool-corporation-and-kirbys-commercial-ltd-ca-1968/>.

Swarb, Harris V Sheffield United Football Club Ltd: Ca 1988 (2017),< https://swarb.co.uk/harris-v-sheffield-united-football-club-ltd-CA-1988/>.

Collins vs. Godfrey (1831) 1 B & Ad 950

Glasbrook Brothers Limited V. Glamorgan County Council, [1925] AC 270

Charcknock vs. Liverpool Corporation [1968] 1 WLR 1498

Harris V Sheffield United Football Club Ltd [1988] QB 77

Harvey vs. Facey [1893] UKPC 1

Adams v. Lindsell (1818) 106 ER 250

R v. Clarke [1927] HCA 47

Brogden v. Metropolitan Railway (1877) 2 App. Cas. 666 Principles and Practice of Export(Kogan Page Publishers,2011)118