Intention to Create Legal Relations Flashcards
Bunn & Bunn v Rees & Parker
There is a presumption that commercial agreements intend to be binding upon the parties
Rose and Frank Co v Compton Bros
Head clause denied intentions to be legally bound - sufficient to rebut presumption
Smith v Hughes
Intention to be objectively ascertained
Bowerman v ABTA
Unilateral offer was legally binding as the reasonable person would take it to mean the promise of a legally enforceable service
Baird Textiles v Marks and Spencers
Objective assessment can rebut presumption to be bound - parties did not want a formal contract so as to retain flexibility
Hedley v Kemp
Promise conditional on commercial success does not intend to be binding
Licenses Insurance v Lawson
Statements made in anger may negate intention
Leonard v Pepsico
Jest will negate intention
Kleinwort Benson v Malaysian Mining Corporation
Comfort letters have no legal status
Eccles v Bryant
‘Subject to contract’ clauses are not binding
Barbudev v Eurocom
Agreements to agree are not binding as they are too uncertain
Jet2Com v Blackpool Airport
Best endeavours clauses are binding where the object of the endeavours is certain
Balfour v Balfour
No intention to create legal relations between married couples living in amity
Jones v Padavatton
No ICLR between parent and child
Merritt v Merritt
Can be ICLR between separating couples not living in amity
Simpkins v Pays
Mutuality of obligations will imply ICLR
Peck v Lateau
Previous conduct of the parties will imply ICLR
Edmonds v Lawson
Whether parties intended to enter into legally binding relations is an issue to be determined objectively and not by inquiring into their respective states of mind
Steinberg v Scala
Minors don’t have capacity to contract
Any contract may be ratified upon reaching majority
Contract is binding on the other party
If the minor rescinds the contract they will only be able to recover any money paid under the contract if there has been a total failure in consideration
Nash v Inman
Contracts with minors for necessities are binding
Waistcoats were not necessities so no contract for minor to uphold
Doyle v White City Stadium
Beneficial contracts of service are binding on minors
Aylesbury v Watford Association
Beneficial contracts of service - look to holistic benefit to minor to ascertain validity of contract
Proform Sports Management v Proactive Sports Management
Beneficial contracts of service are only valid if they confer a holistic educative benefit upon the minor
Gore v Gibson
A person will lack capacity if unable to make decision for himself at the time of contracting i.e. through drunkeness
Ashbury Railway Carriage and Iron v Riche
Companies can contract as legal personalities distinct from shareholders
Must act within the limits of the articles of association for contracts to be valid
