ITCLR

Question 1

Give the ITCLR intro

Answer 1

C may claim there is intention to create legal relations with D for ___.
The court will determine the intention of the parties based on what the reasonable person would have thought based on the circumstances.
There are two types of agreement for the purposes of intent - social and commercial

Question 2

Give the ITCLR social agreements para

Answer 2

In social agreements there is a presumption that there is not intention to create legal relations which must be rebutted to prove the contract is binding.

• Jones v Padvatton shows if parties have a strong relationship it’s less likely they have intention.
• In Belfour v Belfour there was no intention as the contract was between a married couple and made verbally, rather than in writing, like in Merritt v Merritt.
• Simpkin v Pays shows there may be intention in a social agreement for winnings of a competition if money was put towards the agreement with the expectation winnings would be shared.

Question 3

Give the ITCLR commercial agreements para

Answer 3

In commercial agreements there is a presumption that there is intention to create legal relations which must be rebutted to prove the contract is not binding.

• Esso v CCE shows when businesses offer promotions, this will usually have intention due to the financial benefits of the promotion, and it is wrong for companies to lie.
• Jones v Vernon’s Pools shows a commercial dispute between a customer and a business may not have intent if there is a clear message the agreement is not legally binding.
• Rose and Frank v Crompton Bros shows if businesses state something is not binding, the courts will treat it as such.
• Sadler v Reynolds shows if it is hard to know which presumption applies, the burden of proof falls to the party which wants it to be commercial.

Question 4

Give the evals for ITCLR

Answer 4

• Presumptions for each type of agreement creates certainty in the law as parties should know if agreements are legally binding, however, in cases like Sadler it may be hard to know which assumptions apply creating uncertainty.
• However, as presumptions can be rebutted, regardless of where cases like Sadler end up justice can be achieved, however, this adds to the uncertainty as parties can’t be sure if the contract is binding.
• It is possible to rebut the presumption if there is evidence like in Jones they showed flexibility, however, risk of inequality of bargaining power.