• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Intention to create legal relations

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

~ ~ ?A mere statement of intention made in the course of conversation will not constitute a binding promise, though acted upon by the party to whom it was made???? According to this questionit asks whether the mere fact that a statement of intention to createa contract which is formed when an offer by one party is accepted by the other party, how the parties becomes legally bounded to act accordingly to the actions of the agreement? A contract does not exist simply because there is an agreement between people. The parties to the agreement must intend to enter into a legally binding agreement. To discuss this first we have to think about the legal capacity of a contract. So then we have to see what?s the difference between a legally binding promise or an agreement and a mere promise which has no legal consequences. For this purpose theremust be a clear view to see what are requirements of an agreement to be a legally binding contract. First the parties must intend the agreement to be legally binding. ...read more.

Middle

Balfour. She did not rebut the presumption.“”. This statement clearly shows that the rebuttable presumption on social and domestic agreements is that parties do not intend to be legally bound when they enter in to agreements. But as it is meant to be the presumption can be rebutted. Merritt v Merritt (1970) is a best example for such a rebutted presumption. In this case the husband left the matrimonial house to live with another women and he agreed to his wife in writing to pay her £40 per month maintenance from which she had to repay the mortgage and, when the repayment was completed, to transfer the house into a sole ownership. The wife did in fact pay off the mortgage but the husband changed his mind. She sued and succeeded because the court of appeal decided that there was clear intent. Crucially, they were legally separated.So it’s clear in Balfour, on the other hand Merritt case illustrates that the courts want to avoid unwanted litigations rushing in the courts by these social and domestic agreements and the parties had entered a binding contract as the setting of the agreement was commercial and no domestic or social. ...read more.

Conclusion

And it statedthat it was a basic condition of the relationship between the parties that any transaction entered into in respect of the pool should not be attended by or gives rise to any legal relationship. And it was held that the words ?Binding in honour only? were contained on each coupon and these words were sufficient to rebut the presumption. On these examples clearly shows when the agreements arrive in a commercial context the courts presume that the parties of the agreement do intent to create legally binding relations and that presumption can be rebutted. According to the above facts it?s clear that an agreement of the parties is becomes with the all three combination of intention, offer and acceptance crucial element to make a legally binding agreement. So, only just saying that a party to create an agreement with intention to create legal relation does not make any sense to the other party if the agreement even carried out and then breached, but there must be clear evidence to justify that whether or not the parties really intended them to be so exposed or to find really what is in the parties mind. Reference, 1. P. Richards: The law of contract 09thEd. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree Contract Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related University Degree Contract Law essays

  1. Critically discuss the presumptions relating to the intention to create legal relations.

    However, it is vital that one does not rely too much into the principle applied in the Balfour case. This is illustrated in the case of Jones v Padavatton [1969]4. This involved an agreement between a mother and a daughter.

  2. The mere prescence of consideration normally implies the existence of an intention to ...

    It is important to note here that many jurisdictions do not recognise 'intention to create legal relations' as a separate requirement to enforce an otherwise valid contract. India and China are good examples where there is no separate requirement of proving the intention to create legal relations.

  1. Doctrine of Intention to Create Legal Relations

    Balfour v Balfour, the parties had already separated and were on bad marital terms. In commercial agreements the presumption is that there is an intention to create legal relations, in which case strong evidence will have to be given to prove otherwise.

  2. This paper discusses the start-up, organisation and conduct of the company "Anders & Birgitte" ...

    As mentioned in the introduction, we will not introduce the case any further as the specific issues will be introduced and discussed in the respective sections. We will conclude each section with a closing statement. 4.1. Recourse against Designers In this question we will discuss is whether A&B can

  1. "Intention to create legal relations could be used to replace the doctrine of consideration. ...

    In the English Common law system, a promise is not legally binding as part of a contract except if it is made in a deed or supported by some consideration. 18 Sir Guenter Treitel Q.C., describes the purpose of consideration as, "...to put some legal limits on the enforceability of

  2. How does the Doctrine of Intention to create legal relations fit into the Traditional ...

    This opinion is supported by Hepple, his ideas centre around how consideration is defined and viewed within the law of contract. Hepple obstinately believes Lord Atkin caused the most confusion by interpreting consideration wrongly in Balfour v Balfour5. He characterises consideration to mean "mutual promises" or "benefit received by one party or loss by the other".

  1. Advise Anna of her legal position

    or would have acted as they did without any such contract, there is no necessity to imply a contract. It is merely putting the same point another way to say that no intention to make any contract will be inferred."

  2. To make a contract legally binding, there must be an explicit offer and acceptance, ...

    "In a unilateral contract the offeror promises payment or reward in exchange for the offeree performing a particular act or acts"2. The above rule regarding invitations to treat does not apply to unilateral contracts. Captain Puffin makes the first offer in the form of his posted letter to Lucia.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work