Stevenson, Jaques & Co v McLean [1880]

Stevenson, Jaques, & Co v McLean [1880] 5 QBD 346 is a notable English contract law case, focusing on the communication of acceptance through telegraph, and offering a distinctive perspective in contrast to the postal rule.

The plaintiffs, Stevenson, Jaques, & Co (P), were iron merchants engaged in purchasing and reselling iron. The defendant, McLean (D), held warrants for quantities of iron and, through a telegram dated Saturday, September 27, offered to sell iron to P for "40s., nett cash, open till Monday" (the original offer). On Monday morning, P sent a telegram to D inquiring whether D would "accept forty for delivery over two months, or if not, longest limit you would allow" (P's telegraphic inquiry). However, D did not respond to this inquiry and proceeded to sell all warrants to another party on the same day, subsequently sending a telegram to P at 1:25 pm on Monday advising of the sale of all warrants (D's telegram of warrants sold).

The key issues at hand included determining whether P's telegraphic inquiry constituted a counteroffer, the effect of which would extinguish D's original offer, and whether D effectively revoked the offer prior to its acceptance by P. Additionally, there was a question about whether D's telegram at 1:25 pm, advising of the sale of warrants, effectively revoked the original offer even though P received it after accepting the offer.

In rendering judgment, Lush J held that P's telegraphic inquiry at 9:42 am was not a rejection but a mere inquiry about potential modifications to the terms. While D had the right to revoke the offer before the end of Monday, this revocation was only effective upon reaching P. Lush J ordered D to pay £1900 to P, subject to any reduction by subsequent ruling.

Addressing the first issue, Lush J noted the nature of P's telegraphic inquiry and the volatility of the iron market, concluding that it was not a counteroffer but a mere inquiry to which D should have responded. This distinguished the case from Hyde v Wrench, where a clear counteroffer was made.

Concerning the second and third issues, Lush J clarified that a unilateral promise to hold open an offer is revocable before acceptance, but the revocation is only effective when communicated to the offeree. As P had not received D's telegram of warrants sold before accepting the offer, the original offer remained valid, resulting in the formation of a contract.

In summary, the case underscores the significance of effective communication in contract law, particularly in the context of revocation through telegraphic means, offering a nuanced perspective distinct from the traditional postal rule.
Back to blog
UOLLB SQE Turbocharge

UOLLB SQE Turbocharge

Get ready for the SQE1 with high-performance SQE Study Guides developed by UOLLB and published by UOL Press to revolutionise your study method and exam strategy.

Turbocharge SQE Performance Here

UOL Case Bank

Upon joining, you become a valuable UOL student and gain instant access to over 2,100 essential case summaries. UOL Case Bank is constantly expanding. Speed up your revision with us now.

Subscribe Now

Where are our students from?

Council of Europe
Crown Prosecution Service
Baker Mckenzie 
Yale University
University of Chicago
Columbia University
New York University
University of Michigan 
INSEAD
University of London
University College London (UCL)
London School of Economics (LSE)
King’s College London (KCL)
Royal Holloway, University of London 
Birkbeck, University of London
SOAS, University of London
University of Manchester
University of Zurich
University of York
Brandeis University
University of Exeter
University of Sheffield
Boston University
University of Washington
University of Leeds
University of Law
University of Kent
University of Hull
Queen’s University Belfast
Toronto Metropolitan University
Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
University of Buckingham
ESSEC Business School

  • Criminal Practice

    Diagrams and Charts

    Our carefully designed diagrams and charts will guide you through complex legal issues.

  • Criminal Law

    Clear and Succinct Definitions

    Key concepts are concisely defined to help you understand legal topics quickly.

  • Property Law

    Statutory Provisions

    Statutory provisions are provided side by side with legal concepts to help you swiftly locate the relevant legislation.

  • Public Law

    Case Summaries

    We have summarised important cases for you so that you don't need to read long and boring cases.

  • Evidence

    Rules and Exceptions

    Rules and exceptions are clearly listed so that you know when a rule applies and when it doesn't.

  • Company Law

    Terminology

    Legal terms and key concepts are explained at the beginning of each chapter to help you learn efficiently.

  • Case Law

    Case law is provided side by side with legal concepts so that you know how legal principles and precedents were established.

  • Law Exam Guide

    Law Essay Guide

    You will learn essential law exam skills and essay writing techniques that are not taught in class.

  • Law Exam Guide

    Problem Question Guide

    We will show you how to answer problem questions step by step to achieve first-class results.

  • Conflict of Laws

    Structured Explanations

    Complex legal concepts are broken down into concise and digestible bullet point explanations.

  • Legal System and Method

    Legal Research

    You will learn legal research techniques with our study guide and become a proficient legal researcher.

  • Jurisprudence and Legal Theory

    Exam-focused

    All essential concepts, principles, and case law are included so that you can answer exam questions quickly.