Statute of Frauds Flashcards
Categories of contracts which fall within the Statute of Frauds (1695):
1) Special Promises to answer for the debt default or miscarriage of another person.
Kirkham v. Marter (= contract was unenforceable since it was not supported by writing)
Contracts which fall within the Statute of Frauds (1965):
2) Agreements made upon consideration of marriage.
Butterly v. Ennis
Goods of Leslie Good, Deceased (oral agreement made upon consideration of marriage without any evidence in writing failed)
Categories of contract which fall within the Statute of Frauds (1695):
3) Contracts which are not to be performed within a year from the making thereof.
Naughtiness v. Limestone Land Co
AND
Contracts will not fall within the statute of they were meant at the time of entrance to be performed within exactly one year OR it is to be performed in full by one party within one year.
Hynes v. Hynes (ALSO a case in which the courts recognized that despite them being brothers, ITCLR arose in such circumstances)
Categories of contract which fall within the Statute of Frauds:
4) Interests in Land.
Governed by the Sale of Goods Act 1893, which expressly provides that the definition of “goods” includes anything attached to the land.
Categories of contract which fall within the Statute of Frauds:
5) Contract for the sale of goods exceeding £10.
Scully v. Corboy (=part payment was deemed to be acceptable and sufficient, eliminating the need for a written evidence).
Aspects of the Statute of Frauds:
a) Note or memorandum in writing.
Statute does NOT REQUIRE that contracts which fall within it have a note or memorandum when the contract itself is entirely in writing (which essentially makes the note or memorandum unnecessary).
Aspects of the Statute of Frauds:
2) Contents of the memorandum.
Memorandum must include the holy three P’s.
- Parties to the Contract;
- Property to be sold;
- Price to be paid.
PLUS ALL OF THE OTHER ESSENTIAL TERMS
Godley v. Power
Black v. Grealy
Aspects of the Statute of Frauds:
3) Signed by the party to be charged or his agent.
Casey v. Irish Intercontinental Bank (= solicitor’s letterhead served as a signature).
According to the ELECTRONIC COMMERCE ACT 2000, Section 13, an electronic signature should be sufficient for the purposes of the Statute of Frauds (1695).
Aspect of the Statute of Frauds
4) Joinder of Documents.
Kelly v. Ross (= signed documents did NOT refer to the other items/documents, therefore, not making up a valid memorandum).
Subject to Contract???
Mulhall v. Haren
Boyle v. Lee
