This takes me back to my Accounting subjects, and Commercial Law - I think it's applicable here, and this case changed the practices in law over contracts. It's the Carbolic Smokeball case. Anyways, here's some interesting stuff (well to myself anyway):-
Contracts
The Carbolic Smoke Ball offer, which bankrupted the Co. because it could not fulfill the terms it advertised Contract is based on the Latin phrase pacta sund servanda (literally, promises must be kept). Almost everyone makes contracts everyday. Contracts can be made orally, like buying a newspaper, or in writing, like signing a contract of employment. Sometimes writing is required for a contract, like buying a house.
In common law jurisdictions there are four key elements to the creation of a contract, illustrated in Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Company. A medical firm released an advert for its new wonderdrug: the Smokeball. The firm said anyone who bought and used its smokeball for throat problems and did not find results would get £100. The Smokeball did not work for a lot of people. They all sued for their £100. Fearing bankruptcy Carbolic argued advert was merely an 'invitation to treat': not every shop window advert means that there will be stock for the product, and so their advert was like a pre contractual negotiation. But the House of Lords ruled that Carbolic's advert contained all four key elements for people to create contracts straight away: (1) Carbolic made an offer for £100 (2) people accepted it by simply using the Smoke Ball and not getting better (3) users and Carbolic both 'intended' to be legally bound because 'intention' is interpreted on an objective basis (4) both sides provided 'consideration' for the deal, by giving something of value to the other (money or the smoke ball).
In Civil Law jurisdictions, consideration is not necessarily a requirement for a contract. However, in common law systems the concept of culpa in contrahendo or estoppel is increasingly used to create obligations during pre-contractual negotiations.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Look at the 4 points guys.
(1) Carbolic made an offer for £100
Gold Coast made an offer to Steve Turner to play football for them.
(2) people accepted it by simply using the Smoke Ball and not getting better
It was just accepted by Gold Coast that he would play for them, so they ceased negotiations for & with other players in his position.
(3) users and Carbolic both 'intended' to be legally bound because 'intention' is interpreted on an objective basis
Gold Coast's intention was that he would be part of their roster in 2007. That is the way they interpreted the negotiations, but maybe with less objective thought than in the Carbolic case.
(4) both sides provided 'consideration' for the deal, by giving something of value to the other (money or the smoke ball).
Both sides DEFINITELY considered the deal, because pricing & terms were agreed upon. Value was given to both parties.
That my friends is the system by which a contract is determined. All (4) legal check(s) in my books have been satisfied.
Gold Coast should take Steve Turner to the cleaners. Imagine having to fall back on Chris Walker due to this, when there were a few gun wingers available (Grothe for example) able to negotiate.