• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.43
• /
• pp.25-52
• /
• 2009

An acceptance is effected by a statement or other conduct of the offeree indicating assent. Silence or inactivity does not in itself amount to acceptance. An acceptance of an offer becomes effective at the moment the indication of assent reaches the offeror. It uses in stating rules on whether an acceptance is too late to form a contract and an offeree may withdraw an acceptance after transmission. The offeree may indicate assent by performing an act such as one relating to the dispatch of the goods or payment of the price without notice to the offeror. The acceptance by action also is to be performed within the time fixed between the parties or within a resonable time. However, an oral offer must be accepted immediately by an offeree. After an acceptance by action, the offeree avoid revocation of an offer by giving the offeror prompt notice to that effect. Even if a reply an offer contains additions, limitations or other modifications is a rejection of the offer and constitutes a counter offer, the reply to an offer contains additional and different terms which do not materially alter the terms of the offer constitutes an acceptance unless the offeror objects to the discrepancy or to that effect. Additional or different terms relating to the price, payment, quality & quantity of the goods, time & place of delivery, a party's liability or the settlement of disputes are considered to materially alter the terms of the offer.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.63
• /
• pp.3-24
• /
• 2014

This paper focuses on the formation of contract under CISG through the case by the Korean court. Under the CISG, an offer means that a proposal for concluding a contact constitutes the offer, if it is sufficiently definite and indicates the intention of the offeror to be bound in case of acceptance. An acceptance is statement made by or other conduct of the offeree indicating assent to an offer, and this statement purports to be an acceptance but contains additional or different terms which do not materially alter the terms of the offer constitutes an acceptance. In practice, parties negotiate for lots of contract terms to conclude the contract, and the last reply indicating of assent which is made by statement or other conduct to a proposal for concluding a contract would be an acceptance. At this time the most important factor is the intention of parties whether they intend the offer or the acceptance, Purchase order by buyer or Offer Sheet by seller would be understand as condition precedent for the formation of contract. Nevertheless, keep in mind that the Korean court is consistent in the way Purchase order by buyer or Offer Sheet by seller is an acceptance to conclude contract.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.24 no.4
• /
• pp.127-145
• /
• 2014

The wording of Article 18 shows that a statement made by or other conduct of the offeree indicating assent to an offer is an acceptance. Meanwhile, Article 19 states that this reply with different terms is a rejection of the offer and constitutes a counteroffer. For example, additional or different terms relating, among other things, to the price, payment, quality and quantity of the goods, place and time of delivery, extent of one party's liability to the other, or the settlement of disputes are considered to alter the terms of the offer materially. However, this reply with different terms which do not materially alter the terms of the offer constitutes an acceptance unless the offer or, without undue delay, objects orally to the discrepancy or dispatches a notice to that effect. As a result, the acceptance depends on whether different terms are material or not. CIETEC holds that the deletion of contract violation liability clause is not equal to an alteration to the extent of one party's liability to the other as stipulated in Article 19(3) of the CISG. In addition, CIETAC recognizes that one party had orally accepted the modifications made to the sales confirmation, with even China declaring against an oral contract. Lastly, CIETAC holds that the sales confirmation has been established when both parties signed on the sales confirmation instead of the acceptance being effective. Korean companies should, thus, note these issues when they solve disputes at CIETAC.