R v Clarke

Infobox Court Case
name = R v. Clarke
court = Australian High Court


date_filed =
date_decided =
full_name =
citations = (1927) 40 CLR 227
judges = Higgins J, Starke J, Isaacs ACJ
prior_actions =
subsequent_actions =
opinions =
transcripts =
Keywords =

"R v. Clarke" (1927) 40 CLR 227 is court case decided by the Australian High Court in the law of contract.

Facts

The claimant wanted to compel the Crown to pay a reward it had offered for information leading to the conviction of a murderer. The claimant gave the information. But he gave it while he was under investigation himself for murder. He told the police "exclusively in order to clear himself". It was uncertain whether he was thinking about the reward at the time he coughed up the information.

Judgment

Higgins J interpreted the evidence to say that Clarke had forgotten about the offer of the reward. Starke J and Isaacs ACJ only went so far as to say that he had not intended to accept the offer. The Court held it was necessary to act in "reliance on" an offer to accept it and therefore create a contract. [at 235, per Isaacs ACJ] Starke J said "the performance of some of the conditions required by the offer also establishes "prima facie" an acceptance of the offer." [at 244] But here it was held that the evidence showed, Mr Clarke was not acting on the offer. So a presumption that conduct which appeared to be an acceptance was relying on an offer was displaced.

ee also

*"Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Company"
*"Williams v. Carwardine"

Notes

References

*Paul Mitchell and John Phillips, 'The Contractual Nexus: Is Reliance Essential?' (2002) 22(1) "Oxford Journal of Legal Studies" 115-134

External links

*