Intention To Create Legal Relations

Question 1

Intention to create legal relation

Answer 1

Once offer and acceptance have taken place, and consideration is established to identify whether the parties intend to form a contract they intend to create legal relations, this intention can be expressed or implied

Question 2

Intention to create legal relations AO3

Answer 2

P: there is an argument that there shouldn’t be a need to prove legal intent as offer acceptance and consideration should be enough intention to create legal relations are a necessary because it prevents individuals from being legally bound when they did not intend on creating legal relations
DP: this element of ITCRL all was judges to respect the wishes of the parties involved
WDP: avoid frivolous claims with no weight and prevents opening floodgates

Question 3

Subheadings of intention to create legal relations

Answer 3

Business or domestic agreement
Business agreement
Social and domestic arrangements

Question 4

Business or domestic agreement

Answer 4

When it is unclear whether the agreement is a domestic or buisness agreement the burden of proof lies with the claimant to prove there was an intention to create legal relations

Question 5

Business agreement

Answer 5

Buisness agreements are presumed to be legally binding however these presumptions can be rebutted
Sometimes contracts can be binding in honour only meaning they are not contractually enforceable

Question 6

Binding in honour only

Answer 6

Sometimes contracts can be binding in honour only meaning they are not contractually enforceable

Question 7

Binding in honour only case

Answer 7

Jones v vernon pools
Held: as c signed the coupon meant there was no contractual obligation for the pools company to honour the agreement

Question 8

Binding in honour only AO3

Answer 8

One reason for reaching this decision was on the basis that the pools company were protected from fraudulent claims in todays technical age companies can be protected from fraudulent claims so perhaps the decision is outdated the words bing in honour only are not common language used today some people who read that state will not understand it

Question 9

Free gift / prize

Answer 9

When a free gift / prize is offered in order to promote a buisness this can be legally binding
When prizes are offered in competitions companies intend to create legal relations

Question 10

Free gift / prize case

Answer 10

McGowan v radio Buxton
Held: there was an intent to create legal relations c had to be compensated

Question 11

Free gift / prize AO3

Answer 11

It is fair that prizes and free gifts are binding / have intention to be legally binding be cause the claimant has fulfilled their side of the bargain to promote the buisness the defendants also fulfill their side if these agreements were not legally binding one party would suffer a detriment and other benefits
DP: this upholds public policy because the courts are protecting the claimant’s interests granting them justice
WDP: furthermore making these decisions binding means there is no loophole in the law the defendant cannot escape liability also it is fair for the courts to impose liability or defendants that are buisness are most probably in a better financial position to enable the, to compensate

Question 12

Letter of comfort

Answer 12

Al letter of comfort is usually binding
It is a document written by a trusted reliable source which provides assurance that an obligation will be fulfilled

Question 13

Letter of comfort case

Answer 13

Kleinsworth benson ltd v Malaysian mining cooperation (mcc)
Held: the letter wasn’t legally binding mcc weren’t obliged to do anything

Question 14

Letter of comfort AO3

Answer 14

P: it’s the responsibility of the court to identify whether the agreement is binding or not this is an example of judicial creativity as the judges will decide on a case by case basis whether the agreement is legally binding or not
DP: this also conflicts it’s the separation of powers as judges are going outside their constitutional role
WDP: Howe fairer decisions will be made as each case will be dealt with individually allowing the claimants access to justice

Question 15

Social and domestic arrangements

Answer 15

These agreements are presumed to be legally binding in ding though this can be rebutted

Question 16

Social and domestic arrangements AO3

Answer 16

The courts have created the two presumptions which help to make decisions as they have criteria to follow this is advantageous for lawyers and clients as lawyers are able to advise clients on the likely outcome of cases
DP: this upholds the rule of law as the law is certain
WDP: furthermore this will reduce the financial burden on the claimants as they will not meet to pay unnecessary costs for financial representation

Question 17

Spouses cases

Answer 17

Balfour and Balfour
Held: no intention to intention to create legal relations as they were married with the agreement was made
Meritt v meritt
Held:there was an intention to create legal relations as the couple had separated when the agreement was made

Question 18

No intention to create legal relation spouses case

Answer 18

Balfour v Balfour

Question 19

Intention to create legal relation spouses case

Answer 19

Meritt v merittt

Question 20

Spouses AO3

Answer 20

P: The outcomes are not different enough as the only difference is whether the agreement was made during the marriage the decision in Balfour v Balfour does not effect Modern thinking a it isn’t an old case today when making agreements in a marriage the parties may intend on becoming legally bound
DP: this is also an example of judicial creativity as judges are making decisions on a case by case basis this conflicts with the separation of powers
WDP: however the courts are respecting the wishes of the parties in Meritt v Meritt as the parties and divorced they did not intend to be legally bound as the relationship had broken down

Question 21

Case for prenuptial agreements

Answer 21

Radmacher v grantino

Question 22

Radmacher v garnatino

Answer 22

The case of Radmacher v garnatino made prenuptial agreements legally binding as long as both parties intended to be legally bound when the agreement was made

Question 23

Family agreements

Answer 23

When families make agreements that appear to be be business arangment’s in count has to asses whether the matter is a domestic one or one with legal intent.

Question 24

Family agreements case

Answer 24

Jones v padvatton
Held: neither mother or daughter had intended to create legal relations

Question 25

Family agreements AO3

Answer 25

P: the decision can be criticised as the. Are divided the coa judges probing that cases like these can lead to inconsistent outcomes the judges within the court of appeal are highly experienced experts therefore if they are split in their decision about whether the agreement is business social lay people will definitely not be able to to differentiate
DP: this means the law is confusing to lay people and therefore inaccessible
WDP: as courts of appeal judges have deferring opinions on when there is or isn’t an intention to be legally bound this could lead to the public loosing faith in the justice system
VWDP: this could deter them from proposing a claim

Question 26

Lottery syndicates

Answer 26

If money has been paid it is more likely to be a business agreements than a social one
with competitions and lottery syndicates even when they are agreed between family or friends this is usually a buisness agreements

Question 27

Lottery syndicates case

Answer 27

Simpkins v pays
Held: she was bound to split the money as this wasn’t a social arrangement

Question 28

Case for social chatter

Answer 28

Wilson and Burnett
should be some record of agreement

Question 29

Wilson and Burnett

Answer 29

There should be some record of agreeemet or it may be deemed social chatter

Question 30

Financial security at risk

Answer 30

If parties put their own financial security at risk then they must have intended the agreement to be legally binding

Question 31

Financial security at risk case

Answer 31

Parker v Clarke
Held: this was legally binding the young couple had given up on their security and they were entitled to damages

Question 32

Financial security at risk AO3

Answer 32

P: this decision is morally correct as if the courts had decided there was not ITCLR the young couple would be left at a significant financial loss and possibly homeless
DP: this decision uphold public policy as the interest and the right of the young people are being protected
WDP: however the courts are not respecting the wishes of the old couple a contract is being enforced upon them when they had no intention of being legally bound

Question 33

social and domestic arrangements subheadings

Answer 33

Spouses
Family agreements
Lottery syndicates
Financial security at risk

Question 34

Buisness agreements subheading

Answer 34

Free gifts prize
Letter of comfort

Question 35

Conclusion

Answer 35

The rules on on domestic intention need ram as they are outdated
Rest in book………