According to the rules of revocation, an offeror’s withdrawal of his offer is possible and effective, provided that revocation is given before acceptance (Payne v Cave  3 T.R. 148). For the revocation to be valid, however, it must be communicated to the offeree before acceptance takes effect as expressed in the case of Byrne v Van Tienhoven (1880) 5 CPD 344. A further implication of this case is the effect of the postal rule, such that unlike the postal rule of acceptance (Adams v. Lindsell  B ALD 681), revocations sent via post are not considered to have been communicated to the offeree until after it has been brought to the mind of the offeree (Henthorn v. Fraser  2 Ch. 32, 37), indicating a stricter application in the need for the offeree to actually have knowledge of the act. Conversely, a revocation can be communicated to the offeree via reliable third parties. In Dickinson v Dodds (1876) 2 ChD 475, it was held that once the person to whom the offer was made knows that the property has been sold to someone else, it is too late for him to accept the offer.While the aforementioned rules apply to the revocation of offers for bilateral contracts, it is necessary to acknowledge that revocation is also possible for unilateral contracts. However, since unilateral contracts do not require acceptance from the offeree but performance in order to be enforceable, an offeror’s revocation, to be valid must be given before the offeree commences performance (Errington v Errington  1 All ER 149).A contract is an enforceable agreement, which gives rise to a set of obligations between two parties duly recognized by the law (Treitel 2003, p. 1). As an important safety net to protect parties’ interests, avoid conflict, or at the very least, ensure that conflicts can be resolved properly. contracts serve an important purpose in guiding the conduct of business between individuals. In order to be enforceable however, both parties of the contract must indicate assent to be bound by its terms.