Which statement about acceptance under common law is NOT true?

In common law, the principle of acceptance is governed by specific rules that ensure clarity and mutual consent between the parties involved in a contract. The statement that is not true regarding acceptance under common law is that "acceptance may include conditions attached."

For a valid acceptance to occur under common law, it must be an unequivocal agreement to the terms of the offer. This means that the acceptance must mirror the offer exactly, known as the "mirror image rule." If the acceptance introduces new terms or conditions, it does not constitute a valid acceptance but rather a counteroffer. A counteroffer effectively rejects the original offer and presents a new offer for consideration.

On the other hand, the requirement that acceptance must be communicated to the offeror ensures that the offeror is aware of the acceptance, allowing for a mutual agreement to be formed. Additionally, time frames for acceptance, if stated in the offer, are critical as they outline the period within which the acceptance must be made. All these elements are vital for a valid contract formation under common law, while the introduction of conditions or terms not found in the original offer disrupts the acceptance and creates ambiguity.