D advertised the sale of wild birds which when “offering for sale” such animals was contrary to the Protection of Birds Act. QBD acquitted him on the grounds that advertising was merely an “invitation to treat” and not an offer to sell.
Lord Parker CJ: Unless the advertisement is from a manufacturer, it makes business sense to treat advertisements as invitations to treat, not offers: He says that if an advertisement is an offer then traders may be forced to supply an infinite quantity of the substance regardless of whether they have the necessary stock e.g. a menu in a restaurant would make the owner contractually liable if a customer ordered more food than the restaurant had. CW: no, the courts would simply need to interpret the offer as being one “subject to availability