The mere prescence of consideration normally implies the existence of an intention to create legal relations (Willitson-1969) if this be the case why do the two concepts co-exist?

The first 200 words of this essay...

The mere prescence of consideration normally implies the existence of an

intention to create legal relations (Willitson-1969) if this be the case why do

the two concepts co-exist?

Many countries have recognised 'intention to create legal relations' as separate requirement for

enforcing an otherwise valid contract. English law is the best example in that category, which

requires this along with other requirements of offer, acceptance and consideration. Professor

Samuel Williston criticised this view emanating in England. His opinoin is that the separate

element of intention is foreign to the common law, imported from the Continent by academic

influences in the nineteenth century and useful only in systems which lack the test of

consideration to enable them to determine the boundaries of contract.

The insistence on a requirement of intention in addition to the other elements of a validly

formed contract of offer, acceptance, and consideration is unnecessary. This view has been taken

not only by Williston in U.S. but also Hepple in the UK. Hepple argues that the problems with

this area derive largely from a failure to take account of the particular approach to consideration