The Claimant's claim failed: the agreement was a purely domestic arrangement and not legally enforceable.
1 of 8
Merritt v Merritt (1970)
The court held there was an intention to create a legally ninding agreement berween husband and wife.
2 of 8
Jones v Padavatton (1969)
The agreement with regard to a house was so ambiguous as to be incapable of being a contract.
3 of 8
Simpkins v Pays (1955)
A lodger refused to share winnings, claiming it was purely a domestic relationship. His defence failed and he was bound by the agreement.
4 of 8
Esso Petroleum Co Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise (1976)
A majority decision in the House of Lords said that as Esso was clearly trying to gain business from a promotion, there was an intention to be bound by the arrangement.
5 of 8
Rose and Frank Co v H R Crompton and Bros Ltd (1924 and 25)
The agreement was not a formal agreement (honourable pledge) and there was not an intention to be bound.
6 of 8
Wilson v Burnett (2007)
Three women attended a bingo game, planning to split winnings. The court found there was no intention to be legally bound by this agreement.
7 of 8
Appleson v Littlewoods Ltd (1939) and Jones v Vernon Pools (1938)
Coupons were binding by honour only.
8 of 8
Other cards in this set
Card 2
Front
The court held there was an intention to create a legally ninding agreement berween husband and wife.
Back
Merritt v Merritt (1970)
Card 3
Front
The agreement with regard to a house was so ambiguous as to be incapable of being a contract.
Back
Card 4
Front
A lodger refused to share winnings, claiming it was purely a domestic relationship. His defence failed and he was bound by the agreement.
Back
Card 5
Front
A majority decision in the House of Lords said that as Esso was clearly trying to gain business from a promotion, there was an intention to be bound by the arrangement.
Comments
No comments have yet been made