Capacity Flashcards
Who has full contractual capacity under English law?
A. An 18-year-old of sound mind and not intoxicated
B. A 17-year-old in full-time employment
C. A 25-year-old with moderate learning difficulties
D. A person intoxicated at the time of contracting
A. An 18-year-old of sound mind and not intoxicated
Explanation: Adults aged 18+ are presumed to have full capacity unless affected by mental incapacity or intoxication.
What is the legal effect of a contract for necessaries made by a minor?
A. It is void and unenforceable
B. It is binding, and the minor must pay the full price
C. It is binding, and the minor must pay a reasonable price
D. It is enforceable only with parental consent
C. It is binding, and the minor must pay a reasonable price
Explanation: A minor is liable to pay a reasonable price, not the market value, for necessaries supplied for their benefit.
Which of the following is considered a necessary under contract law?
A. Essential medication
B. A video game console
C. Jewellery
D. A mobile phone upgrade
A. Essential medication
Explanation: Necessaries must suit the person’s lifestyle and actual needs—this includes essentials like medicine or food.
Under the Mental Capacity Act 2005, a person lacks capacity if they are unable to:
A. Make decisions independently of others
B. Understand, retain, use, or communicate relevant information
C. Complete a financial transaction
D. Make decisions due to disability
B. Understand, retain, use, or communicate relevant information
Explanation: This is the core test for capacity under Section 3(1) of the Act.
A minor signs a contract for football training but receives no benefit and is restricted in moving clubs. What is the likely outcome?
A. The contract is enforceable due to it being sports-related
B. The contract is binding once signed
C. The contract is enforceable if the minor misrepresented their age
D. The contract is not binding as it is not for the minor’s benefit
D. The contract is not binding as it is not for the minor’s benefit
Explanation: Even for employment or education contracts, they must be beneficial to bind a minor.
A minor buys a designer coat despite already owning several. What is the likely legal result?
A. The contract is binding due to the nature of the item
B. The minor must pay full value
C. The contract is not enforceable as the coat is not necessary
D. The contract is void due to age
C. The contract is not enforceable as the coat is not necessary
Explanation: Necessaries must meet actual needs; luxury or duplicate items generally don’t qualify.
A person signs a contract while heavily intoxicated. The other party knew this. Is the contract valid?
A. Yes, because intoxication doesn’t affect contracts
B. No, because it is automatically void
C. Yes, but only if it’s in writing
D. No, the contract is voidable due to known incapacity
D. No, the contract is voidable due to known incapacity
Explanation: If the person didn’t understand the contract and the other party knew of the intoxication, the contract is voidable.
The Court of Protection has the authority to:
A. Create commercial agreements for people lacking capacity
B. Revoke all existing contracts by a person lacking capacity
C. Declare whether a person lacks legal capacity
D. Assess a person’s criminal liability
C. Declare whether a person lacks legal capacity
Explanation: Under Section 15 of the Mental Capacity Act 2005, the Court of Protection can declare capacity or incapacity.
Which of the following contracts is automatically binding on a minor?
A. A car lease agreement
B. A contract for essential groceries
C. A mobile phone contract
D. A contract to attend a concert
B. A contract for essential groceries
Explanation: Contracts for necessaries (like food) are binding on minors for a reasonable price.
A 19-year-old with a serious brain injury signs a contract to manage their investments. They do not understand the terms. What must they show to void the contract?
A. That they did not understand and the other party knew this
B. That the contract was not signed before witnesses
C. That they were intoxicated at the time
D. That they lacked general life skills
A. That they did not understand and the other party knew this
Explanation: The contract is voidable if the person lacked understanding and the other party was aware.
A minor lies about being 18 and signs a phone contract. What is the legal position?
A. The contract is enforceable due to misrepresentation
B. The contract is binding because it’s commercial
C. The contract is not enforceable against the minor
D. The contract is valid if ratified by a parent
C. The contract is not enforceable against the minor
Explanation: Misrepresentation of age does not bind the minor; the protection still applies.
Which principle applies when assessing a person’s capacity to contract?
A. Capacity is decided generally for life
B. Capacity is assumed for those over 16
C. Capacity is irrelevant if a contract is signed
D. Capacity is assessed in relation to the specific decision at the time
C. Capacity is assessed in relation to the specific decision at the time
Explanation: Capacity is decision-specific and assessed at the moment the contract is made.
A minor signs up for tutoring sessions that help her pass key exams. What is the legal position?
A. The contract is binding as it is for her educational benefit
B. The contract is void due to age
C. The contract is binding if her parents pay
D. The contract is not enforceable unless ratified at 18
A. The contract is binding as it is for her educational benefit
Explanation: Contracts for education are binding if they are beneficial to the minor.
