Brinkibon+v+Stahag+Stahl

Facts
Prolonged negotiations between buyers - English company (Brinkibon) and sellers - an Austrian company (Stahag Stahl) over sale of steel bars. Brinkibon sent a telex accepting the terms of sale offered at a point in time by Stahag Stahl. Contract was not performed – that is Brinkibon did not get their steel and sued Stahag in the English Cts. Stahag objected on the grounds that the English Cts had no jurisdiction over an Austrian company.

Brinkibon arguments

 * Contract formed in London because acceptance was communicated to the offeree in London
 * Why? – Telex is like post or telegram legal rule is that in general acceptance is complete when the item is posted
 * Result if successful is that contract is formed in London and law of UK should govern, including laws relating to service of writs
 * Contract formed in Vienna because acceptance was communicated to offeree in Vienna - this is the rule for inter praesentes communication (people in each other’s presence) and telex has been assimilated to other inter praesentes communications such as telephone
 * Result if successful is that contract is not formed in London and law of UK should not govern

Stahag Stahl arguments

 * Contract formed in Vienna because acceptance was communicated to offeree in Vienna - this is the rule for inter praesentes communication (people in each other’s presence) and telex has been assimilated to other inter praesentes communications such as telephone
 * Result if successful is that contract is not formed in London and law of UK should not govern

Held
When and where the contract was formed – if it was formed in England, then the English Rules of Court were applicable which allowed “ a party to serve a writ on someone outside the jurisdiction, “if the contract was made within the jurisdiction”. Ct found that contract was formed in Vienna so service of writs was improper.


 * Brinkibon arguments || Stahag Stahl arguments - ||
 * * Contract formed in London because acceptance was communicated to the offeree in London
 * Why? – Telex is like post or telegram legal rule is that in general acceptance is complete when the item is posted
 * Result if successful is that contract is formed in London and law of UK should govern, including laws relating to service of writs
 * Contract formed in Vienna because acceptance was communicated to offeree in Vienna - this is the rule for inter praesentes communication (people in each other’s presence) and telex has been assimilated to other inter praesentes communications such as telephone
 * Result if successful is that contract is not formed in London and law of UK should not govern ||  ||