Chapter 2 Self-test questions

. From whose perspective is the objective approach to contractual interpretation taken?

From the perspective of the parties as a whole.

From the perspective of the judge.

From the perspective of a reasonable person.

From the perspective of an unbiased, mutual friend of the parties.

. Where a buyer believes that they are purchasing one thing, and the contract states another, what takes priority?

The subjective beliefs of the buyer.

The objective wording in the contract.

. When may the court depart from a strictly objective approach to ascertaining the parties' intentions?

In all cases.

Whenever, in the court's view, it would be fair to do so.

If one of the parties knows that the other party's real intention is different to what they have communicated.

Never.

. Where the objective facts are ambiguous, and one of the parties is responsible for that ambiguity, whose understanding of the ambiguity will be favoured?

The party responsible for the ambiguity.

The innocent party.

The understanding of a reasonable observer.

The understanding of the judge.

. Where the objective facts are ambiguous, and neither party is responsible for that ambiguity, how will the court proceed?

The court will adopt the understanding of the offeror.

The court will adopt the understanding of the offeree.

The court will adopt the understanding of a reasonable observer.

The court may not be able to find a contract between the parties.

. When might the court assess the subjective intentions of the parties?

In all cases.

If it is necessary to resolve objective ambiguity.

Where one of the parties has absconded.

Never.

. Where A knows that O is making a mistake as to a term of the contract, is A able to enforce the contract?

Yes, because the written word of the contract always takes priority.

Yes, A is entitled to take advantage of O's mistake.

No, but A may be able to enforce the contract in the sense that O believes it to exist.

No, never.

. Which of the following views of Smith v Hughes is supported by Roberts v Leicestershire County Council?

The view that the seller's claim failed because there was a contract for the sale of old oats which the seller could not perform.

The view that the seller's claim failed because the contract was void.

The view that the seller's claim failed because he took advantage of the buyer.

Roberts v Leicestershire County Council does not support any of the views given.

. On which of the following points was Smith v Hughes clear?

That the word 'old' was used in the oral contract of sale.

That the seller knew that the buyer believed that the oats being sold were old.

That the seller's claim failed because the contract was void.

That mistakes as to terms must be distinguished from mistakes as to motives.

. What is the rule in L'Estrange v Graucob?

The party signing a document containing contractual terms is bound by their signature.

The party signing a document containing contractual terms is only bound by their signature if they have read the document.

The party signing a document containing contractual terms is never bound by their signature.

None of the options above are correct.

. Why might the rule in L'Estrange v Graucob be criticised for being unfair?

Signature may be a mere formality and does not necessarily signal understanding.

The signing party may not have read the agreement.

The signing party may not have properly understood the agreement.

All of the options given are correct.

. For which type(s) of contract has the rule in L'Estrange v Graucob been softened?

All contracts.

Consumer contracts.

Commercial contracts.

No type of contract.

. Can contracts be concluded without signed writing?

Yes.

No.

. How may agreement to a contract be communicated?

Oral communication.

Written communication.

By any method stipulated by the offeror.

All of the options given are correct.

. When will a contract not necessarily be enforced in its objective sense?

Always.

If there has been misrepresentation.

If one party has not read the contract before signing it.

Never.

. From whose perspective was the 'objective approach' taken in Upton on Severn UDC v Powell?

A reasonable person in the person making the representation's own position.

A reasonable person in the addressee's position.

A reasonable person who is entirely detached from the proceedings.

None of the options above are correct.

. From whose perspective was the 'objective approach' taken in Destiny 1 Ltd v Lloyds TSB Bank Plc?

A reasonable person in the person making the representation's own position.

A reasonable person in the addressee's position.

A reasonable person who is entirely detached from the proceedings.

The judge's perspective.

. What is the consequence of an estoppel?

It prevents a person from going back on their representation.

It prevents the recipient of a representation from relying on it.

It protects a person who has made a representation.

It causes detriment to a party who has received a representation.

. Why is the objective test to contractual promises substantively different to estoppel?

There is no need for a reasonable belief that the representation is true for estoppel.

The contractual test derives from the common law, estoppel derives from equity.

The objective test applies even though there has not been an action by the other party in reliance on any representation.

The two doctrines are identical.

Quiz Content