As a rule of convenience, if the offer is accepted by mail, the contract is entered into at the time the acceptance has been reserved. [30] This rule applies only if the parties are implicitly or explicitly considered as means of acceptance. [31] It excludes contracts relating to land, misdirected letters and immediate modes of communication. The relevance of this early 19th century rule to modern conditions, where there are many faster means of communication, has been questioned, but the rule remains a right for now. As offer and acceptance are necessarily linked, offer and acceptance are analyzed jointly in California (United States) as sub-elements of a single element known as consent of the parties or as mutual consent. [33] «The results of my experience are consistent with Those of Michelson and with the law of general relativity.» For the assumption, the essential requirement is that, from a subjective point of view, the parties behave in a way that demonstrates their consent. After this session of the theory of the spirit of the treaty, a party was able to resist a claim of violation by demonstrating that it did not intend to be bound by the agreement, only if it seemed subjective that it intended to do so. This is not satisfactory because one party does not have the opportunity to know the undisclosed intentions of another party. One party can only act on the basis of what the other party objectively reveals (Lucy V Zehmer, 196 Va 493 84 S.E. 2d 516) to be its intention. Therefore, a real meeting of minds is not necessary.

In fact, it has been argued that the idea of «meeting minds» is a very modern mistake: the judges of the 19th century spoke of the «ad idem consensus» that modern teachers wrongly translated into «meeting spirits», but which in fact means «agreement with the same cause». [18] In English law, the issue arose in Butler Machine Machine Co Ltd v. Ex-Cell-O Corporation (England) Ltd[29] which pred their preminum in the transaction. Lord Denning MR preferred the view that documents should be considered as a whole and the important factor is to find the decisive document; On the other hand, Lawton and Bridge LJJ preferred a traditional analysis of acceptance of the offer and found that the last counter-offer prior to the start of the presentation nulled all previous offers. The absence of an additional counter-offer or refusal by the other party is understood as tacit acceptance. Consent and the involvement of the person on whom a change is drawn to pay it if, according to the terms of acceptance, due. Approval status Harmony of opinion, statement, action or character; Consent Concord; Compliance how, there is a good agreement between the members of the Council.