Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
intention to create legal relations - Coggle Diagram
intention to create legal relations
ao1 basics
social/domestics (friends/family) - starting point of 'the presumption of no intention'
commercials (business) - starting point of 'the presumptions of intention'
(social) party who wants a contract has to 'rebut the presumption' by proving that intention exists
domestic
Balfour v Balfour - no intention if married and together when agreement made
Merritt v Merritt - intention if separated when agreement made and/or in writing
Jones v Padavatton - mother & daughter case, family so no intention to be legally bound - domestic agreement
Parker v Clarke - old & young couple, if you rely on a promise and act on it, intention
Snelling v Snelling - if family members in business together, intention
social (specifically lifts)
Buckpitt v Oates - shared lifts and money = no intention to be legally bound
Albert v MIB - one driver who is paid = intention, contrast^ as well established agreement with established set-out payments
competitions, bingo and gambling
Wilson v Burnett - casual conversation = no intention
Simpkins v Pays - regular arrangements with shared money = intention, contrast^ money involved
ao2 basics
using the words 'subject to contract' is enough to makes sure no intention is present until a contract has been drawn up and signed by parties, e.g. buying or selling houses
trade unions - any TU negotiations are assumed to have no intention to create legal intention until they're clearly drawn u in writing and signed by the parties
commercial/business
Carlill v Carbolic Smokeball Company - adverts promising a reward = intention
Esso v Customs and Excise - promotions giving away some sort of collectable in return for a sale = intention, there was some commercial gain
using clear wording
Jones v Vernon's Pools - clear wording negating intention = no intention
Rose v Frank Co v Crompton - clear wording negating intention = no intention
letters and wording
Kleinwort v Malaysia Mining Corp - comfort letters = no intention
Edwards v Skyways - using the words 'ex grate' is not enough to prove no intention, out of good will