... have terminated, and hence could not be accepted. On the other hand, if it was a request for further information, as in Stevenson, Jacques v McLean, the offer was still open and could have been accepted.2 B could just have been seeking further information from A about the terms of the original offer. He could have been commenting on his own ability to pay (his financial circumstances) and inquiring what method of payment he could manage. If this was the case, then he was just talking around the offer before deciding how to respond to A's offer. Alternatively, B's reply could be a counter-offer. To be a counter-offer, a statement must contain a promise and not just a fact of information, as it was indicated in Harvey v Facey.3 So the question becomes did B intend his statement to be a promise to buy the horse on the condition ...

See this essay or coursework document in full right now