Hinkley v de Vries (No. 2)

The case of Hinkley v de Vries (No. 2) involved the parties, the plaintiff, and the defendant, in a dispute concerning the validity of an agreement. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The primary issue before the court was whether the plaintiff was entitled to a declaration that an agreement between the parties was still in effect. This depended on whether the postal acceptance rule applied and whether a subsequent letter constituted a notice of revocation of the offer.

The court had to determine whether the original draft agreement, forwarded by post, was effectively accepted when the plaintiff posted a duly signed and witnessed copy back to the defendant. This was complicated by the fact that the defendant sent a letter, before receiving the signed agreement, stating that upon receipt of a duly signed and witnessed copy, an identical copy duly signed, witnessed, and dated would be returned. The court had to decide if the defendant's letter could be interpreted as a revocation of the original offer. Additionally, the court considered whether the terms of the first agreement or the second agreement were binding, given that the plaintiff had signed, witnessed, and returned the first agreement before receiving the defendant's letter.

The court concluded that the postal acceptance rule did apply in this situation, and therefore, the original draft agreement was accepted when the plaintiff posted the signed copy. The court found that the defendant's letter did not constitute a notice of revocation of the offer, as it was sent after the acceptance had already been dispatched. Consequently, the court held that the first agreement was the subsisting agreement between the parties. The court granted the plaintiff's claim for a declaration that the first agreement was still in effect.