1.) How can someone be held to have made a contract when the necessary acceptance was "in secret jest"? In other words, why must a joke be visibly a joke to a reasonable observer for there to be no acceptance?
As per the judgements relating to these cases are concerned, a joke must be visible a joke to a reasonable observer for there to be no acceptance because , a person cannot set up that he was merely jesting when his conduct and words would warrant a reasonable person in believing that he initiated a real agreement.
Hence , if his acts are in such a way which may appear to a reasonable observer as true, he can be held to have made a contract when the necessary acceptance was "in secret jest".
Get Answers For Free
Most questions answered within 1 hours.