Bilateral v unilateral contracts

Bilateral offers allow the offeree to accept via a promise of future performance or by performance itself. By contrast, a unilateral offer can be accepted only through performance. With a unilateral offer, a promise of future performance is insufficient to demonstrate mutual assent.

Unilateral offers provide greater protection for the person making the unilateral offer (the "offeror"), who is not bound until they have received the thing that they've sought. By contrast, it creates greater risks for the person receiving the offer (the "offeree"). The risk to the offeree is that the offeror will revoke their offer (terminating the offeree's ability to accept) after the offeree has taken steps in preparation to complete their performance or even that they've begun performing.

While the law has subsequently developed to offer greater protection to unilateral offerees (see Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 45), unilateral offers still favor the offeror.

We'll see how this plays out in Petterson v. Pattberg and then how the law changed by reading Cook v Coldwell Banker.

This book, and all H2O books, are Creative Commons licensed for sharing and re-use with the exception of certain excerpts. Any excerpts from the Restatements of the Law, Principles of the Law, and the Model Penal Code are copyright by The American Law Institute. Excerpts are reproduced with permission, not as part of a Creative Commons license.