ITCLR A03

Question 1

Sentence/Points

Answer 1

Good for businesses, bad for social, exceptions give some protection, halfway S+C

Question 2

Point 1: Clarity for Businesses

Answer 2

• There is an ITLR for contracts made in commercial context (Edwards v Skyways)
• In this case the courts enfirced a redundancy agreement despite the offer being made ex gratia (as a favour not legal right)
• The presumption for Commercial/Business agreements is key in providing certainty for businesses, benefiting them and the economy as more agreements made…

Question 3

Point 2: Social Settings

Answer 3

Lack of Protection
- The law presumes there is no ITLR (Balfour v Balfour)
- This presumption is outdated and does not reflect the willingness to bring legal action to enforce right of society in modern day
- Balfour was 1919 and position of women changed much since then, if a contract is between 2 equals then there’s no reason why it should not be enforceable in domestic situations

Question 4

Point 3: Social Exceptions

Answer 4

• The presumption of no ITLR can be rebutted in certain circumstances (parties are separated, money changes hands, financial security at risk - Merritt v Merritt and Parker v Clarke)
• Example: Would have created an injustice to not enforce the contract in Parker v Clarke because it concerned living arrangements and one party may have ended up homeless
• The rules are applied in court to protect the weaker party, more fair

Question 5

Point 4: Both/half-way

Answer 5

• In Sadler v Reynolds the contract was between a journalist and businessman who were friends about an autobiography
• There may be situations which fall into a ‘halfway house’ between domestic and commercial which affects the burden of presumption, like in Sadler
• In this case the judge said the oral agreement ‘fell somewhere between an obviously commercial transaction and a social exchange’. Onus on journalist to prove was ITLR
• This means that the law is not clear, lack of strict guidelines, judges interpretation, inconsistency
• (H) judges created a rule for these instances where burden of proof on party who seeks to prove there was ITLR

Question 6

Reforms

Answer 6

• ITLR is outdated, more just to enforce contracts based of consideration alone, would also resolve the issue in Sadler v Reynold
• The parties should make it clear when forming the contract whether binding or not, this means no dispute and is there is then easily enforced