This case is concerned with invitation to treat (ITT) in offer and acceptance chapter of contract law
Facts of fisher v bell
The defendant had displayed flick knives on the window of the shop. He was charged with offering for the sale of flick knives, contrary to s. 1 (1) of the Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act 1959.
The issue in this case was whether the displayed flick knives was an offer or an invitation to treat (ITT)
It was held that the displayed flick knives were an invitation to treat not an offer. But what would a normal person think of this situation.
If you are passing by a shop and you see some item displayed with a price tag. It would appear to us that they are offering us that product to buy.
But the courts tend to choose that the displayed items are Invitation to treat (ITT). So the defendant was not guilty under the S.1(1) of the Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act 1959.