Abstract

English contract law has traditionally used the requirement of a matching offer and acceptance as the means of identifying agreement. A more flexible approach was proposed by Lord Denning in several cases in the 1970s, but firmly rejected by the House of Lords in Gibson v Manchester City Council [1979] 1 WLR 294. More recently there have been some suggestions of a revival of Lord Denning’s approach, culminating in the decision of the Supreme Court in RTS Flexible Systems Ltd v Molkerei Alois Müller Gmbh [2010] UKSC 14, [2010] 1 WLR 753. This article analyses this development, discussing the implications for both practice and theory of a more flexible approach to formation of contracts. It also draws comparisons with the approach taken in other European jurisdictions and the United States. It concludes that provided the development is kept within identifiable limits, it provides a welcome harmonisation of English law with that of other jurisdictions.