Fisher v Bell

Last updated

Fisher v Bell
Magnano-switchblade.png
CourtDivisional Court
Decided10 November 1960
Citation(s)[1961] 1 QB 394, [1960] 3 All ER 731
Keywords
Contract, offer, invitation to treat, display of goods for sale, shop window, offensive weapons

Fisher v Bell [1961] 1 QB 394 is an English contract law case concerning the requirements of offer and acceptance in the formation of a contract. The case established that, where goods are displayed in a shop, such display is treated as an invitation to treat by the seller, and not an offer. [1] [2] The offer is instead made when the customer presents the item to the cashier together with payment. Acceptance occurs at the point the cashier takes payment.

Contents

Facts

The defendant displayed a flick knife in the window of his shop next to a ticket bearing the words Ejector knife – 4s, (i.e. four shillings).

Under section 1 of the Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act 1959 (which was expanded in 1961, after this case finished, to deal with the gap in the law):

(1) Any person who manufactures, sells or hires or offers for sale or hire, or lends or gives to any other person—

(a) any knife which has a blade which opens automatically by hand pressure applied to a button, spring or other device in or attached to the handle of the knife, sometimes known as a “flick knife” or “flick gun”; or
(b) any knife which has a blade which is released from the handle or sheath thereof by the force of gravity or the application of centrifugal force and which, when released, is locked in place by means of a button, spring, lever, or other device, sometimes known as a “gravity knife”

shall be guilty of an offence ... and in the case of a second or subsequent offence to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding...or to both such imprisonment and fine. [3]

(2) The importation of any such knife as is described in the foregoing subsection is hereby prohibited.

In late 1959, the claimant, a chief inspector of police, brought forward information against the defendant alleging he contravened section 1(1) by offering the flick knife for sale.

Judgement

Bristol Justices

At first instance, the Prosecutor submitted that the Defendant has displayed the knife and ticket in the window with the objective of attracting a buyer, and that this constituted an offer of sale sufficient to create a criminal liability under section 1(1) of the Act. Mr Obby Simakampa submitted that this was not sufficient to constitute an offer. The judges at first instance found that displaying the knife was merely an invitation to treat, not an offer, and thus no liability arose. The Prosecutor appealed the judges' decision.

Divisional Court

Lord Parker CJ in the Divisional Court held there was no offence because there was no "offer for sale". Although the display of a knife in a window might at first appear to "lay people" to be an offer inviting people to buy it, and that it would be "nonsense to say that [it] was not offering it for sale", whether an item is offered for the purpose of the statute in question must be construed in the context of the general law of the country. He stated that the general law of the country clearly established that merely displaying an item constituted an invitation to treat. He also read the statute on an exclusive construction ( inclusio unius est exclusio alterius ), noting that other legislation prohibiting the sale of weapons referred to "offering or exposing for sale" (emphasis added). The lack of the words exposing for sale in the Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act 1959 suggested that only a true offer would be prohibited by the Act. The court dismissed the appeal. Goods displayed in a shop are merely an invitation to treat or invitation to trade.

Ashworth J and Elwes J agreed.

Significance

The 1959 Act was almost immediately amended by the Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act 1961 section 1 to add (to the offence) or exposes or has in his possession for the purpose of sale or hire, which remains the law. [4] A similar shopkeeper would today be successfully prosecuted. The principles of offer and acceptance in the case remain good law.

Draft statute writers, prohibiting certain sales, made almost identical drafting mistakes in Partridge v Crittenden [5] and British Car Auctions v Wright. [6]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Switchblade</span> Type of knife

A switchblade is a pocketknife with a sliding or pivoting blade contained in the handle which is extended automatically by a spring when a button, lever, or switch on the handle or bolster is activated. Virtually all switchblades incorporate a locking blade, where the blade is locked against accidental closure when the blade is in the open position. It is unlocked by a mechanism that allows the blade to be folded and locked in the closed position.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Butterfly knife</span> Type of folding knife

A balisong, also known as a butterfly knife, fan knife or Batangas knife, is a type of folding pocketknife that originated in the Philippines. Its distinct features are two handles counter-rotating around the tang such that, when closed, the blade is concealed within grooves in the handles. A latch sometimes holds the handles together; typically mounted on the one facing the cutting edge.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ballistic knife</span> Knife with ejectable blade

A ballistic knife is a knife with a detachable blade that can be ejected to a distance of several meters/yards by pressing a trigger or operating a lever or switch on the handle. Spring-powered ballistic knives first appeared in books and press reports on Soviet and Eastern Bloc armed forces in the late 1970s. Commercially-produced ballistic knives briefly gained notoriety in the United States in the mid-1980s after they were marketed and sold in the United States and other Western countries. Since then, the marketing and sale of ballistic knives to civilians has been restricted or prohibited by law in several nations.

Assault occasioning grievous bodily harm is a term used in English criminal law to describe the severest forms of battery. It refers to two offences that are created by sections 18 and 20 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861. The distinction between these two sections is the requirement of specific intent for section 18; the offence under section 18 is variously referred to as "wounding with intent" or "causing grievous bodily harm with intent", whereas the offence under section 20 is variously referred to as "unlawful wounding", "malicious wounding" or "inflicting grievous bodily harm".

In criminal law, incitement is the encouragement of another person to commit a crime. Depending on the jurisdiction, some or all types of incitement may be illegal. Where illegal, it is known as an inchoate offense, where harm is intended but may or may not have actually occurred.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Offer and acceptance</span> Two components of agreement

Offer and acceptance are generally recognized as essential requirements for the formation of a contract. Analysis of their operation is a traditional approach in contract law. This classical approach to contract formation has been modified by developments in the law of estoppel, misleading conduct, misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, and power of acceptance.

In criminal law, a mistake of fact may sometimes mean that, while a person has committed the physical element of an offence, because they were labouring under a mistake of fact, they never formed the mental element. This is unlike a mistake of law, which is not usually a defense; law enforcement may or may not take for granted that individuals know what the law is.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Assisted-opening knife</span> Type of folding knife

An assisted-opening knife is a type of folding knife which uses an internal mechanism to finish the opening of the blade once the user has partially opened it using a flipper or thumbstud attached to the blade.

<i>Partridge v Crittenden</i>

Partridge v Crittenden [1968] 1 WLR 1204 is an English legal case which was heard by the Divisional Court of the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court of England and Wales on appeal from Chester magistrates' court, and is well known for establishing the legal precedent in English contract law that advertisements are usually considered to be invitations to treat.

<i>Spencer v Harding</i>

Spencer v Harding (1870) LR 5 CP 561 is an English contract law case concerning the requirements of offer and acceptance in the formation of a contract. The case established that an offer inviting tenders to be submitted for the purchase of stock did not amount to an offer capable of acceptance to sell that stock, but rather amounted to an invitation to treat.

Knife legislation is defined as the body of statutory law or case law promulgated or enacted by a government or other governing jurisdiction that prohibits, criminalizes, or restricts the otherwise legal manufacture, importation, sale, transfer, possession, transport, or use of knives.

An offensive weapon is a tool made, adapted or intended for the purpose of inflicting physical injury upon another person.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">English criminal law</span> Legal system of England and Wales relating to crime

English criminal law concerns offences, their prevention and the consequences, in England and Wales. Criminal conduct is considered to be a wrong against the whole of a community, rather than just the private individuals affected. The state, in addition to certain international organisations, has responsibility for crime prevention, for bringing the culprits to justice, and for dealing with convicted offenders. The police, the criminal courts and prisons are all publicly funded services, though the main focus of criminal law concerns the role of the courts, how they apply criminal statutes and common law, and why some forms of behaviour are considered criminal. The fundamentals of a crime are a guilty act and a guilty mental state. The traditional view is that moral culpability requires that a defendant should have recognised or intended that they were acting wrongly, although in modern regulation a large number of offences relating to road traffic, environmental damage, financial services and corporations, create strict liability that can be proven simply by the guilty act.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Agreement in English law</span>

In English contract law, an agreement establishes the first stage in the existence of a contract. The three main elements of contractual formation are whether there is (1) offer and acceptance (agreement) (2) consideration (3) an intention to be legally bound.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Invitation to treat</span> An expression of willingness to negotiate

An invitation to treat is a concept within contract law which comes from the Latin phrase invitatio ad offerendum, meaning "inviting an offer". According to Professor Andrew Burrows, an invitation to treat is

an expression of willingness to negotiate. A person making an invitation to treat does not intend to be bound as soon as it is accepted by the person to whom the statement is addressed.

Payne v Cave (1789) 3 TR 148 is an old English contract law case, which stands for the proposition that an auctioneer's request for bids is not an offer but an invitation to treat. The bidders make the offers which can be accepted by the auctioneer.

<i>City and Westminster Properties (1934) Ltd v Mudd</i> English contract law case

City and Westminster Properties (1934) Ltd v Mudd [1959] Ch 129 is an English contract law case, regarding the parol evidence rule. It illustrates one of the large exceptions, that a written document is not deemed to be exhaustive of the parties intentions when there is clear evidence of a collateral contract. It shows that even evidence from outside a written agreement may contradict evidence inside it.

Burglary is a statutory offence in England and Wales.

The purposive approach is an approach to statutory and constitutional interpretation under which common law courts interpret an enactment within the context of the law's purpose.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Offensive Weapons Act 2019</span> United Kingdom law

The Offensive Weapons Act 2019 is an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. The act addresses crimes related to acid attacks ; knife crime prevention orders; the sale of, delivery and possession of knives and other offensive weapons; and introduced further restrictions on firearms. It was introduced to Parliament as a government bill by Sajid Javid and Baroness Williams of Trafford of the Home Office.

References

  1. "Fisher v Bell - 1961". www.lawteacher.net. Retrieved 31 January 2024.
  2. Jackson, Nicola (1 September 2019), "Fisher v Bell [1961] 1 QB 394; [1960] 3 WLR 919", Essential Cases: Contract Law, Oxford University Press, retrieved 31 January 2024
  3. Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act 1959 UK Legislation
  4. Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act 1961
  5. Partridge v Crittenden [1968] 1 WLR 1204
  6. British Car Auctions v Wright [1972] 1 W.L.R. 1519 Archived 18 November 2017 at the Wayback Machine
  7. "ICLR".