Principles

·     CONTRACT — Accord and Satisfaction — Apology and acceptance

 An offer of an apology for breach of contract coupled with an acceptance of the apology does not amount to an accord and satisfaction since an apology is not an offer, and the acceptance of an apology is not a contractual acceptance

Judgment

* Court: B. Awadalla, I. and M.A. Hassib J.

Advocates: EM. Krorifli………………...for defendant applicant 

Abdel Wahab Abu Shakima.……………for plaintiff respondent

M Y. Mudawi, P J., April 16, 1963 (HC-CS.8l4.1962) :— The

defendant’s advocate in this case seems to admit liability though he contests the damages to be granted. His allegation that there was a subsequent agreement to drop the matter in consideration of an apology does not impress this Court as a really serious defence for at no have apologies and like gestures of politeness been considered by the Courts whe then in England or in this country as within the definition of valuable consideration.

in view  of the above this Court is of the opinion that defendant intends to admit liability i.e. their commission ol a breach of contract

As for the issues with regard to the quantum of damages the two parties will be requested to lead evidence if they so desire

Bahiker Awadalla, 1., August 5, 1963:—I am of the opinion that this application should be dismissed.

It does not seem to me that there was accord and satisfaction case. The essence of accord and satisfaction is an acceptance by jured party of something other than that originally agreed upon.in 8 Hallsbury Laws of England 206 (3rd ed. 1954) it is stated as follows:

“After a breach of Contract has taken place the cause of action that arises from the breach may be discharged by accord and satisfaction, that is to say, by an agreement between the parties providing for the acceptance by the promisee of something  else than the remedy to which he is entitled by law, coupled with performance of the consideration agreed upon.”

The elements of this form of discharge are accordingly

(1) An agreement other than the one of which a breach was commited  this means:

(a) an offer

(b) an acceptance,

(c) an intention to  create  legal relations, and

(d) consideratin

(ii) Performance of the consideration agreed upon.

Applicant in his amended statement of defence in the court below stated:

The defendants submit that the plaintiff is estopped by his agreement from raising this action because upon discovery of the mistake, the defendants offered heir apology and the plaintiff accepted to drop the matter in consideration of such apology.”

His Honour the Province Judge ruled that an apology does not Constitute valuable consideration in the eyes of the law. I entirely agree with him.

Nor can an apology, in my view, constitute an offer in the legal sense of that term. An “offer” is something that can be turned into an agreement by acceptance but an apology cannot the subject of that mental act signifying a concurrence of the will which is referred to as “acceptance” in the domain of contract. “To accept an apololgv” in popular parlance means to react favourably towards it. Acceptance here connotes “behaviour” and not a ‘mental process”.

In the present case there was definitely no contract by way of accord and satisfaction..

M A Hassib, J., August 5, 1963:— 1 concur.