Instantaneous communicationTelexCourt of Appeal (England)

Entores Ltd v Miles Far East Corporation

[1955] 2 Queen's Bench 32719551 min read
The case in brief30-second read
Facts
The plaintiff in London sent an offer via telex to the defendant's agent in Amsterdam. The defendant's acceptance was transmitted back to London via telex. A dispute arose over whether the contract was formed in London (where the acceptance was received) or elsewhere.
Issue
Whether the postal rule (acceptance complete on dispatch) applies to telex communication, or whether receipt governs instead.
Held
Telex, like telephone, is an instantaneous mode of communication, distinct from post.
Principle
For instantaneous communication such as telex, the contract is complete where and when the acceptance is received by the offeror.
Cite this

Facts

  • The plaintiff in London sent an offer via telex to the defendant's agent in Amsterdam
  • The defendant's acceptance was transmitted back to London via telex
  • A dispute arose over whether the contract was formed in London (where the acceptance was received) or elsewhere

Issue

  1. Whether the postal rule (acceptance complete on dispatch) applies to telex communication, or whether receipt governs instead.

Held

  • Telex, like telephone, is an instantaneous mode of communication, distinct from post
  • For instantaneous communication, ordinary principles apply: the offeror must actually receive the acceptance for the contract to be complete
  • The contract was therefore formed in London, where the telex acceptance was received

Ratio decidendi

The postal rule is confined to non-instantaneous communication modes where delay is inherent and expected. For instantaneous communication (telex, telephone, and by extension similar modern methods), the contract is complete only upon actual receipt of acceptance by the offeror, at that place and time.

Exam use

How to use it in an answer

  • Part A: Core authority for the receipt rule in instantaneous communication.
  • Part B: Pair directly with Bhagwandas Goverdhandas Kedia v Girdharilal Parshottamdas (1966), the Indian authority applying the identical principle to telephone communication. Contrast with Adams v Lindsell (1818) for the postal rule.
  • Key line: "For telex communication, the contract is complete where and when acceptance is received, not on dispatch."

Cite this

Citation

Entores Ltd v. Miles Far East Corporation [1955] 2 Queen's Bench 327

Reported: [1955] 2 QB 327. This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.