Harvey v Facey (1893) is an English contract law case that dealt with the issue of communications in the formation of a contract.
In this case, Harvey sent a telegram to Facey asking him whether he would sell certain property, and requesting a reply stating the lowest price he would accept. Facey replied with a telegram stating the price, but did not make an offer to sell the property.
Harvey then sued Facey for breach of contract, claiming that Facey’s telegram constituted an offer to sell the property at the stated price, which he had accepted by his initial telegram.
The court held that Facey’s telegram did not constitute an offer to sell the property, but rather a statement of information. The court held that Harvey’s initial telegram was a request for information, and that Facey’s reply was not an offer capable of acceptance.
The case of Harvey v Facey is an important case in the law of contract as it established the principle that a mere statement of information does not constitute an offer capable of acceptance. The case confirmed that for a contract to be formed, there must be an offer that is capable of acceptance, and that the communication of an offer must be distinguished from a mere statement of information.