MATCH THE LEGAL PRINCIPLE WITH THE CORRECT CASE. This case established the rule that a counteroffer will destroy the ori

[answerhappygod]

MATCH THE LEGAL PRINCIPLE WITH THE CORRECTCASE.
This case established the rule that a counteroffer will destroythe original offer. Once an original offer has been destroyed, theofferee cannot go back to it.
Barnett v Chelsea & Kensington Hospital
Goods on a display are invitation not an offer; the customermakes an offer when they take the goods to the register.
Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co
Hyde v Wrench
This case shows that the plaintiff must prove that it was thedefendant’s breach that cause the injury/damage complained of. Alsoknown as the but-for test.
Gurcharan Singh v Government of Malaysia
The outcome of this case proves that a minor does not have thecapacity to enter into a valid contract except under the exceptionof necessity, scholarship, and insurance
Weber v. Brown
If a seller made a false representation, the buyer could rely onsuch presentation and is not required to exercise duediligence.
Boots Cash Chemist v Pharmaceutical Society
McGhee v. National Coal board
SUBJECT : BUSINESS LAW