-Internal management statements of a company that are not intended for outsiders or workers are not offers and cannot be accepted by them. Offer and acceptance seem to be simple concepts, as they are when two people meet face to face. But in a trading company, the possibilities of making and accepting offers are almost endless. A retail store advertises its merchandise in the newspaper. A seller makes his offer by mail or internet. A call indicates that his offer will last 10 days. An offer leaves a decisive term open. An auctioneer is looking for commandments. A bidder gives the bidder the choice. All of these situations can raise sensitive questions, as well as hypothetical situations. Marissa and David are looking for places for their next wedding.
Sam offers them a place for the date they want to get married. Although they love it, they are not yet ready to sign the reservation agreement of the place. Sam agrees in writing that Marissa and David can decide until next Monday whether to keep the place for that specific date. Marissa and David will pay Sam two hundred dollars in exchange for the right to decide by next Monday. It is an option contract. As part of an option contract, Marissa and David can accept or decline the offer until next Monday. After that date, the option contract expires and the offer becomes revocable.  The authors of the UCC attempted to give effect to as many contracts as possible and justified this validity by the intent of the parties and not by formalistic requirements. The official remark on Section 2-204, paragraph 3, states that „if the parties intend to enter into a binding agreement, this subsection recognizes this agreement as legally valid, despite the absence of conditions, if there is a reasonably secure basis for the granting of an appeal….
Trade standards in „indeterminacy“ must be applied. Other sections of the UCC establish rules for the settlement of open provisions, such as price, performance and remedial action. Mainly single trade code, sections 2-305 to 2-310. In a case before the Supreme Court of North Dakota, the plaintiff, in the hope of buying a piece of land from the accused, designed a sales contract, signed it and sent it to the accused for a signature.  The defendants amended the document by writing additional terms and changes to existing terms directly on the document. They signed the agreement and referred it to the applicant after these amendments. The purpose of the mailbox rule is to assist a court in deciding what act is valid if the disclosure of acceptance and revocation is not immediate.  Under the mailbox rule, the bidder`s acceptance of an offer is valid as soon as it is sent.  Once a bidder accepts the offer, the bidder cannot revoke the offer. If, on the other hand, a bidder wishes to revoke the offer, this revocation only applies if the bidder receives it. Similarly, the rejection by the bidder only applies when the supplier obtains it.
The rule is generally referred to as „acceptance in the event of mailing and refusing or revocation after receipt.“ Objectively, the Tribunal found that the terms and practices surrounding the agreement justified a reasonable belief that the parties intended to be bound by an enforceable agreement. The parties had discussed the contract for more than forty minutes, changes were made to the original agreement and there was a provision for the title review.  The expression of a supplier`s willingness to enter into a contract – a normally reasonable means of communication when it is a medium used by the supplier or when it is common to make similar transactions at the time of acceptance of the offer and location is considered a notification upon receipt by the supplier.