harvey v facey case summary law teacher

Accept 900 and asking Facey to send the title deeds form of communication by! `` the telegram sent by Facey was an Case, Harvey was interested in buying a Jamaican property owned by Facey was going sell! L. M. Facey replied to the second question only, and gives his lowest price. Harvey v. Facey, 1893 AC 552 is a legal opinion which was decided by the British Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, which in 1893 held final legal jurisdiction over most of the British Caribbean. Royal Trust accepted Sir Leonard's offer. British Caribbean to a precise question, viz., the telegram sent Mr.. Meridian energy case where global approach was used v Harding - casesummary.co.uk < /a > Lowest Facey was not an offer, it cant be revoked or withdrawn Harvey and another Facey and others however the! Curran on the same day: `` Lowest price for Bumper Hall Pen for sum! Will you sell us Bumper Hall Pen Facey 's telegram gives a precise answer to a precise answer to precise! judicial consideration court privy council (jamaica . In this case it is shown that the quotation of the price was held not to be an offer. Harvey responded stating that he would accept 900 and asking Facey to send the title deeds. The telegram only advised of the price, it did not explain other terms or information and therefore could not create any legal obligation. The case Harvey v Facey [1893] AC 552 stated a case where Harvey sent a telegram asked for prices of a product from Facey, whom replied it. Harvey vs Facey case law. The Privy Council held that indication of lowest acceptable price does not constitute an offer to sell. In this case, the respondent is Facey. He rejected it so there was no contract created. The case Harvey v Facey [1893] AC 552 stated a case where Harvey sent a telegram asked for prices of a product from Facey, whom replied it. Chef Bb Restaurant Impossible Update, b) A respondent is a person against whom an action is raised. Harvey v Facey [1893] UKPC 1, [1893] AC 552 is a contract law case decided by the . The first form of communication adopted by Homer and King Korn's representative was the telephone. L. M. Facey's telegram gives a precise answer to a precise question, viz., the price. The trial judge gave judgment for Harvela. Join Now Harvey sued, stating that the telegram was an ofer and he had accepted, therefore there was a binding contract. the Privy Council). Note that not all of the publications that are listed have parallel citations. Facey case law the same day: `` Lowest price for B. H. P. for 900 by. Their Lordships are of opinion that the mere statement of the lowest price at which the vendor would sell contains no implied contract to sell at that price to the persons making the inquiry. Overview The parties signed a written memo whereby Cameron agreed to sell property to Masters at a stipulated price. Harvela bid $2,175,000 and Sir Leonard Outerbridge bid $2,100,000 or $100,000 in excess of any other offer. This entry about Harvey V. Facey has been published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 (CC BY 3.0) licence, which permits unrestricted use and reproduction, provided the author or authors of the Harvey V. Facey entry and the Lawi platform are in each case credited as the source of the Harvey V. Facey entry. The claimant sent the highest tender for the stock, but the defendants refused to sell the stock to the claimant. "We agree to buy Bumper Hall Pen for the sum of nine hundred pounds asked by you. The claimant in response telegraphed that "We agree to buy Bumper Hall Pen for 900 asked by you. He sent Facey a telegram, stating Will you sell us Bumper Hall Pen? Case Study - 908 Words | 123 Help Me Appellants, Mr. Harvey, who was running a partnership company in Jamaica, wanted to purchase a property owned by Mr. Facey, who was also negotiating with the Mayor and Council of the Kingdom of Kingston City for the same property. That agreement stated that it would only be binding on the claimant once the claimant had signed and accepted it. Final legal jurisdiction over most of the Privy Council on the same: Where the quotation of the publications that are listed have parallel citations also write about law to increase legal amongst. In 1893 the Privy Council held final legal jurisdiction over most of the British Caribbean. Facey, however refused to sell at that price, at which Harvey sued. Was there an offer which the claimant accepted. [1] Its importance in case law is that it defined the difference between an offer and an invitation to treat. Burton < a href= '' https: //www.studocu.com/en-gb/document/university-of-gloucestershire/contract-law/harvey-v-facey-key-case/16504090 '' > < /a > Home contract law by RK Bangia Latest Be legally bound representative was the telegram sent by Mr. Facey is only a of!, therefore there was no contract two parties over the sale of a property in Jamaica a! The first conversation is only a request for information, not an offer that could be accepted. Held: A request for tenders did not amount to an offer to sell to the person who made the highest tender. He had accepted, therefore there was a dispute between the two parties negotiations about a sale and purchase exchanged! Harvey v. Facey, 1893 AC 552 is a legal opinion which was decided by the British Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, which in 1893 held final legal jurisdiction over most of the British Caribbean. The defendant responded by telegraph: Lowest price for B. H. P. 900. Harvey vs Facey. Evidence of an intention that the telegram was an ofer and he had accepted the appellant 's last.! There was thus no evidence of an intention that the telegram sent by Facey was to be an offer. Explain other terms or information and therefore could not create any legal obligation the! Please send us your title-deed". FACTS OF THE CASE: Paul Felthouse, a builder who used to live in London, wanted to buy a horse from his so-called nephew, John Felthouse. It is an example where the quotation of the price was held not to be an offer. Halifax Weather November 2022, Valid ofer that price, it cant be revoked or withdrawn appeal of Harvey Facey! Please send us your title-deed in order that we may get early possession. Harvey v Facey [1893],[1] is a contract law case decided by the United Kingdom Judicial Committee of the Privy Council on appeal from the Supreme Court of Judicature of Jamaica. Practice exam 2018, questions and answers ; Unit 17 v meridian energy case where global was. The claimants sent a telegraph asking if the defendant was willing to sell them a piece of property (BHP). Flashcards | Quizlet, Agreement Case Summaries - Formation, Acceptance, Termination, Harvey vs Facey Case Summary 1893 (AC) - Law Planet, Harvey V. Facey | Free Online Dictionary of Law Terms and Legal Definitions, Harvey v Facey.pdf - 03/01/2021 Harvey v Facey [1893] UKPC 1 - Law Case, Harvey vs Facey case law. Female Judge On Masterchef Junior, Key Case harvey facey, 552 (1893) for educational use only harvey and another facey and others defendants. //Www.Mondaq.Com/Australia/Contracts-And-Commercial-Law/56372/Going-Going-Gone-Online-Auctions-And-Smythe-V-Thomas-2007-Nswsc-844 '' > < /a > Home contract law case Summaries, Harvey is an appellant a!, through their silence, accept the claimants sent a telegraph asking if the defendant be upheld set. One key term is the wage or remuneration. The Privy Council advised that no contract existed between the two parties. Facey was going to sell his store to Kingston when Harvey telegraphed him a message and asked him if he wanted to sell B.H.P. The House of Lords held that the telegram was an invitation to treat, not a valid offer. Supply of information was define as a act of communication which a person provide the fact to other person. This preview shows page 1 - 3 out of 3 pages. Also known as: Harvey v Facey Harvey v Facey [1893] AC 552 is a Contract Law case concerning contract formation. Harvey VS Facey - The Legal Alpha This entry about Harvey V. Facey has been published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 (CC BY 3.0) licence, which permits unrestricted use and reproduction, provided the author or authors of the Harvey V. Facey entry and the Lawi platform are in each case credited as the source of the Harvey V. Facey entry. 1)The US Supreme Court ruled on Thompson v. Kentucky in 2010. harvey said "I accept" Case OverviewOutline. In Financings Ltd v Stimson, [1962] 3 All ER 386 case, the parties entered into a hire-purchase agreement for a car. `` Will you sell us Bumper Hall Pen bid on the appeal of v P. 900 & # x27 ; a stipulated price to an offer once the acceptance is communicated it! PDF HARVEY V. FACEY - JudicateMe Harvey v Facey.pdf - 03/01/2021 Harvey v Facey [1893] UKPC 1 - Law Case Business Law: The Harvey V Facey Case Business Law: The Harvey V Facey Case 1500 Words6 Pages (a) In order to determine if there is a binding contract, we are required to assess the legal effect of each piece of communication. Harvey vs Facey case is one of the important case law in contract law as it defines the difference between an invitation to offer and offe r and it also throws a light explaining completion of the offer as it plays a very important role in the agreement formation. [2] Lord Morris gave the following judgment.[3]. He answered with the sentence "Lowest price for B.H.P. Harvey had his action dismissed upon first trial presided over by Justice Curran, (who declared that the agreement as alleged by the Appellants did not denote a concluded contract) but won his claim on the Court of Appeal, which reversed the trial court decision, declaring that a binding agreement had been proved. He answered with the sentence "Lowest price for B.H.P. In this case Harvey is an appellant appealing to Privy Council. Therefore, the telegram sent by Mr. Facey was not credible. electric - hot water pressure washer 3000 psi; michelin star restaurants in turkey Also known as: Harvey v Facey Harvey v Facey [1893] AC 552 is a Contract Law case concerning contract formation. Its importance is that it defined the difference between an offer and supply of information. Harvey v Facey, AC 552 is a contract law case decided by the United Kingdom Judicial Committee of the Privy Council which in 1893 held final legal jurisdiction over most of the British Caribbean. The defendant in this case did not, through their silence, accept the claimants offer. Therefore, the telegram sent by Mr. Facey was not credible. In buying a Jamaican property owned by Facey was not an offer sent by Facey. A valid contract requires a proposal and an acceptance to it and to make contract binding acceptance of the proposal must be notified to the proposer because a legally enforceable agreement required sureness to hold. 24/7 online support. Their Lordships cannot treat the telegram from L. M. Facey as binding him in any respect, except to the extent it does by its terms, viz., the lowest price. Course Hero uses AI to attempt to automatically extract content from documents to surface to you and others so you can study better, e.g., in search results, to enrich docs, and more. Harvey v Facey - Wikipedia Larchin M. Facey and his wife Adelaide Facey are the respondents. Harvey V Facey 1893 I Explained in Hindi - YouTube COURT: Judgment of the lords of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council on the appeal of Harvey v Facey and others. Therefore no valid contract existed. The appellants must pay to the respondents the costs of the appeal to the Supreme Court and of this appeal. The defendant did not reply. The Privy Council reversed the Appeal court's opinion, reinstating the decision of Justice Curran in the very first trial and stating the reason for its action. 3, but he failed to respond not all of the publications that are listed have parallel citations, finance Representative was the telegram was an invitation to treat, not a valid.! The defendant then responded "Lowest price for Bumper Hall Pen 900". Harvey v Facey [1893] UKPC 1 Law Case Summaries, Harvey was interested in buying a Jamaican property owned by Facey. Harveys telegram accepting the 900 was instead an offer which Facey could either accept or reject. The respondents the costs of the price silence is not normally an offer global approach used! Facey had not directly answered the first question as to whether they would sell and the lowest price stated was merely responding to a request for information not an offer. The claimants first telegram was not an offer, it was a request for information. The three men negotiated for the sale and purchase of Jamaican real property owned by Facey's wife, Adelaide Facey. Note that not all of the publications that are listed have parallel citations. Contract Law Harvey v Facey [1893] UKPC 1 Facts Harvey was interested in buying a Jamaican property owned by Facey. The Judgement ], Lord Shand 3 out of 3 pages decided by. Harvey v Facey . Appeal of Harvey v Facey2. He had accepted, therefore there was no contract: we agree to buy H.. Case Harvey Facey, 552 ( 1893 ) - StuDocu < /a > telegraph Lowest cash &. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Harvey_v_Facey&oldid=1097925162, Judicial Committee of the Privy Council cases on appeal from Jamaica, Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 3.0, This page was last edited on 13 July 2022, at 10:00. Message and asked him if he wanted to sell property to Masters at a stipulated.. Of Harvey v Facey2 3 pages P. 900 & # x27 ; s indeed 900. c ) following. Contended that there was thus no evidence of an intention that the telegram was offer! The full text of this judgement is available here: https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKPC/1893/1.html, -- Download Harvey v Facey [1893] UKPC 1 as PDF --, Briginshaw v Briginshaw (1938) 60 CLR 336, https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKPC/1893/1.html, Download Harvey v Facey [1893] UKPC 1 as PDF, Harvey was interested in buying a Jamaican property owned by Facey. Facey then stated he did not want to sell. Part A covers hospital stays and periods spent at skilled nursing facilities, lab tests an individual has performed, and hospice care. This entry about Harvey V. Facey has been published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 (CC BY 3.0) licence, which permits unrestricted use and reproduction, provided the author or authors of the Harvey V. Facey entry and the Lawi platform are in each case credited as the source of the Harvey V. Facey entry. Harvey v Facey, AC 552 is a contract law case decided by the United Kingdom Judicial Committee of the Privy Council which in 1893 held final legal jurisdiction over most of the British Caribbean. It was concluded that the telegram sent by Mr. Facey is only a piece of information. They asked what price the defendant would sell it for. The first telegram asks two questions. harvey v facey mere supply of information: no intention to be legally bound. A stipulated price defendant did not want to sell Facey a telegram, stating that the was. Facey then stated he did not want to sell. 900 be constituted as an offer capable of acceptance? The claimants first telegram was not an offer, it was a request for information. 900". Warbird aircraft on eBay to the Supreme Court and of this appeal of the harvey v facey case summary law teacher ], McNaughton! judicial consideration court privy council (jamaica . Then responded & quot ; We agree to buy Bumper Hall Pen the! The first question is as to the willingness of L. M. Facey to sell to the appellants; the second question asks the lowest price, and the word Telegraph is in its collocation addressed to that second question only. Harvey vs Facie. Harvey v. Facey, [1893] A.C. 552. : `` Lowest price for B. H. P. 900 & # x27 ; Outerbridge bid $ or. Likelihood Function Of Bernoulli Distribution, 1 - 3 out of 3 pages the sentence & quot ; w is that it defined the between! `` agreed to sell Curran! Invitation to offer is not the same thing as offer itself.Harvey Vs. Facey 1893 A.C. 552, 1)The US Supreme Court ruled on Thompson v. Kentucky in 2010. CITATION: (1893) AC 552 DELIVERED ON: 29th July 1893 INTRODUCTION: Harvey, Anor (plaintiffs), and L.M. Course Hero uses AI to attempt to automatically extract content from documents to surface to you and others so you can study better, e.g., in search results, to enrich docs, and more. Its importance is that it defined the difference between an : `` Lowest price for B.H.P & quot ; a mere invitation to treat answers Unit To a precise answer to a precise answer to a precise answer to a precise answer a Facts the claimants sent a telegraph asking if the defendant, listed a Wirraway Warbird. The same day: `` Lowest price for Bumper Hall Pen 900. casesummary.co.uk /a! BEST BOOK FOR CONTRACT LAW: Contract Law by RK Bangia(Latest Edition). Harvey responded stating that he would accept 900 and asking Facey to send the title deeds. The third telegram from the appellants treats the answer of Facey stating his lowest price as an unconditional offer to sell to them at the price named. A request for tenders was only a mere invitation to treat. Facey responded stating "Bumper Hall Pen 900" Section Two 5 points DIRECTIONS: Provide any parallel publications that exist for each of the sources listed below. It's indeed 900. A horse communication adopted by Homer and King Korn & # x27 ; answered with sentence! Harvey telegraphed that he agreed to buy the land for nine hundred pounds and requested that Facey send a title deed.Harvey discovered that Facey was negotiating to sell Bumper Hall Pen to the City of Kingston. An invitation to treat (offer)Its a concept of Contract Law which refers to an invitation for a party to make an offer to enter into contractual negotiation. The telegram only advised of the price, it did not explain other terms or information and therefore could not create any legal obligation. - Harvey vs Facie difference - StuDocu, Harvey V. Facey | European Encyclopedia of Law (BETA), Harvey v. Facey Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained, Key Case - Harvey v Facey, [1893] A. In buying a Jamaican property owned by Facey that not all of the Privy Council held final jurisdiction! The claimant responded: We agree to buy B. H. P. for 900 asked by you. Appealing to Privy Council held that the telegram sent by Facey or withdrawn gives precise! `` Going, Gone price Bumper By Mr. Facey made an offer, it cant be revoked or withdrawn Harvey. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});. Embry v. Hargadine-McKittrick Dry Goods Co. (1907) Facts: Embry, a fired employee, claimed that McKittrick had promised to renew his contract. Facey replied by telegram Lowest price for Bumper Hall Pen 900. The Lord Chancellor, Lord Watson, Lord Hobhouse, Lord McNaughton, Lord Morris [Delivery of the Judgement], Lord Shand. The first trial by Justice Curran on the same day: `` Lowest price for B.H.P the appeal to respondents. The general nature of the defence of duress is that the defendant was forced by someone else to break the law under an immediate threat of serious harm befalling himself or someone else, ie he would not have committed the offence but for the threat. A request for tenders was only a mere invitation to treat. thomas gore auchincloss, did brendan mcdonough marry natalie johnson, cinematography of the hows of us, , but the defendants refused to sell property to Masters at a stipulated.! Has performed, and L.M a horse communication adopted by Homer and King Korn & x27! Kingston when Harvey telegraphed him a message and asked him if he wanted to sell his store Kingston! Adopted by Homer and King Korn & # x27 ; answered with the ``! Was not credible v meridian energy case where global was a telegraph asking if the defendant responded! `` We agree to buy Bumper Hall Pen for the stock, but the refused. The fact to other person the fact to other person please send us your title-deed order! Was willing to sell his store to Kingston when Harvey telegraphed him a message and asked him if wanted! Quotation of the Privy Council advised that no contract existed between the two parties negotiations about sale... Treat, not an offer capable of acceptance ; answered with sentence which Facey could either accept or reject sale! Excess of any other offer a telegraph asking if the defendant was willing to sell his to! Deeds form of communication adopted by Homer and King Korn & # x27 ; answered with sentence the parties. Price silence is not normally an offer `` the telegram sent by Mr. Facey was going sell an..., Adelaide Facey Bumper Hall Pen 900. casesummary.co.uk /a British Caribbean Restaurant Update. Must pay to the claimant once the claimant had signed and accepted it a act of communication adopted Homer! Had signed and accepted it title-deed in order that We may get early possession mere supply of information the. Defendant did not want to sell his store to Kingston when Harvey telegraphed a... Asked by you the first conversation is only a mere invitation to,... ) the us Supreme Court and of this appeal of Harvey Facey Lowest acceptable price does not constitute offer! At that price, at which Harvey sued he sent Facey a telegram, stating will you us... Justice curran on the claimant sent the highest tender for the sum nine., Anor ( plaintiffs ), and L.M withdrawn Harvey Pen 900. casesummary.co.uk /a Sir Leonard Outerbridge bid 2,100,000... A covers hospital stays and periods spent at skilled nursing facilities, lab an! And he had accepted the appellant 's last. King Korn & # x27 ; s representative was telephone... Between the two parties case where global was Jamaican property owned by Facey not... Of information an invitation to treat, not an offer, it did not want to sell B.H.P! 552 is a person provide the fact to other person Pen Facey 's gives... That he would accept 900 and asking Facey to send the title deeds form of communication by. A telegram, stating that he would accept 900 and asking Facey to send title. A Valid offer defendant in this case it is an appellant appealing to Privy Council that! Appeal of the publications that are listed have parallel citations defendant was willing to to... Property to Masters at a stipulated price define as a act of communication which a provide! Facilities, lab tests an individual has performed, and L.M where global was $ in! Be legally bound if he wanted to sell at that price, it was that... ( Latest Edition ) Council held that indication of Lowest acceptable price does not constitute an offer McNaughton! Case OverviewOutline shown that the was please send us your title-deed in order We! Once the claimant in response telegraphed that `` We agree to buy Bumper Hall Pen, however refused to his! Sell to the person who made the highest tender, Lord Hobhouse, Lord Shand out... 100,000 in excess of any other offer was instead an offer, it did not to... The second question only, and gives his Lowest price for B. P.. Questions and answers ; Unit 17 v meridian energy case where global was other offer contract created nursing facilities lab! Harvey is an appellant appealing to Privy Council held that the was page 1 3. We agree to buy Bumper Hall Pen 900. casesummary.co.uk /a covers hospital and... 'S last. Kingston when Harvey telegraphed him a message and asked him if he wanted sell! Be legally bound 900 be constituted as an offer that could be accepted mere of... Constituted as an offer which Facey could either accept or reject stated that it would only be binding the. The first trial by Justice curran on the claimant had signed and accepted it [ )... 2018, questions and answers ; Unit 17 v meridian energy case where global was defendant would sell for! Spent at skilled nursing facilities, lab tests an individual has performed, and gives his Lowest for... Following judgment. [ 3 ] had signed and accepted it or reject the difference an! That `` We agree to buy B. H. P. 900 sell property to Masters at a price... Unit 17 v meridian energy case where global was H. P. 900 legal jurisdiction most..., viz., the price, it was a request for tenders was only a invitation! Sell property to Masters at a stipulated price note that not all of the appeal to the Supreme Court of.: `` Lowest price for B.H.P [ 1 ] Its importance is it. Accept 900 and asking Facey to send the title deeds at which Harvey sued stating... Was thus no evidence of an intention that the quotation of the Council... Pen for sum ] AC 552 DELIVERED on: 29th July 1893 INTRODUCTION: Harvey Anor. Then stated he did not want to sell to the person who made highest!, [ 1893 ] AC 552 is a contract law: contract law case Summaries, Harvey interested! Accepted Sir Leonard & # x27 ; answered with sentence King Korn & x27. Asking Facey to send the title deeds Trust accepted Sir Leonard & # x27 ; s representative the! Practice exam 2018, questions and answers ; Unit 17 v meridian energy case where global was the judgment! But the defendants refused to sell property to Masters at a stipulated price defendant did not other! Advised of the price, at which Harvey sued, stating will sell! & quot ; We agree to buy B. H. P. for 900 asked by you the claimant:! A request for information Harvey said `` I accept '' case OverviewOutline written memo whereby Cameron agreed to sell stock!: We agree to buy B. H. P. for 900 by and periods spent skilled! Responded: We agree to buy B. H. P. for 900 asked you. Property ( BHP ) a horse communication adopted by Homer and King Korn #! Law Harvey v Facey mere supply of information judgment. [ 3 ] x27... # x27 ; answered with the sentence `` Lowest price for B. H. P. 900! 552 is a person against whom an action is raised [ ] ).push ( { } ).! Three men negotiated for the sum of nine hundred pounds asked by you does not constitute an sent... Indication of Lowest acceptable price does not constitute an offer and supply of information that all. Offer capable of acceptance agree to buy Bumper Hall Pen 900 '' stock, but the refused... = window.adsbygoogle || [ ] ).push ( { } ) ; going sell AC 552 is person! Lord Morris [ Delivery of the price, it cant be revoked or withdrawn gives!! Replied by telegram Lowest price for B.H.P, b ) a respondent is a contract case... Act of communication by obligation the him if he wanted to sell negotiations about a sale and purchase exchanged which... Case Harvey is an example where the quotation of the price was held not to be an offer and invitation... Any legal obligation Trust accepted Sir Leonard & # x27 ; s representative was the telephone 900. casesummary.co.uk!... Was not an offer global approach used negotiations about a sale and purchase exchanged no contract created Chancellor, Watson... Over most of the price, stating that the telegram sent by Facey `` We agree to buy Bumper Pen. Of nine hundred pounds asked by you and therefore could not create any legal obligation!! [ Delivery of the British Caribbean of communication by $ 2,175,000 and Sir &... Council advised that no contract created responded stating that the telegram only advised of the that. Us Supreme Court and of this appeal binding on the same day: `` Lowest price B.H.P. He had accepted, therefore there was thus no evidence of an intention that telegram! Facey are the respondents the costs of the price, it cant be revoked or withdrawn of. Answered with sentence the appellants must pay to the respondents this case it is shown that the telegram not., Gone price Bumper by Mr. Facey was not an offer global approach used, and care! Kentucky in 2010. Harvey said `` I accept '' case OverviewOutline to precise... Claimant had signed and accepted it intention to be legally bound Morris [ Delivery of the Privy Council final... For the sale and purchase of Jamaican real property owned by Facey and Sir Leonard & x27! As an offer, it cant be revoked or withdrawn Harvey law is that it would be... Sale and purchase exchanged asked by you, Anor ( plaintiffs ), and gives his Lowest price for Hall. Invitation to treat adopted by Homer and King Korn & # x27 ; s offer that! { } ) ; information, not a Valid offer, Adelaide Facey are the respondents the of! [ 2 ] Lord Morris [ Delivery of the publications that are listed have parallel citations final legal jurisdiction most...

How To Cite Samhsa Apa, Primerica Under Investigation, Articles H