CONTRACT LAW - Consideration, ICLR & Capacity - ICLR Flashcards
What is ICLR? (2)
An intention to enter into an agreement that has legal ramifications. One of the necessary requirements of a binding contract.
What is the test of the intention in terms of ICLR? (2)
It is objective, which means the intention of the parties’ is to be determined more by what the actions of the parties in the particular circumstances suggests rather than by taking evidence from the parties of what was actually in their minds.
When is ICLR presumed and not presumed ? (2)
Commercial agreement = presumed
Social / domestic agreement = not presumed
Examples of commercial agreements? (3)
Between businesses, individuals and businesses and individuals.
What happens if a party to a commercial agreement wishes to assert legal relations were not intended when the agreement was entered? (2)
The onus is on them to rebut the presumption and the burden of doing so is a heavy one.
What does the case of ESSO PETROLEUM V COMMISSIONERS OF CUSTOMS AND EXCISE 1976 demonstrate? (4)
Specially produced world cup coins were distributed by Esso to their dealers, who offered their customers a free coin with the purchase of four gallons of petrol.
House of lords were divided if a free coin amounted to a sale and so if there was any contract with regards to the coins.
Majority felt that there was ICLR due to the business context and the commercial advantage Esso expected to derive from the promotion.
Minority felt that there was no ICLR relying on the language used in the offer, the trivial value of coins and the unlikelihood any motorist denied a coin would believe that a legal remedy was available to rectify the default.
Is an agreement subject to contract / prima facie binding? (1)
No.
Where has subject to contract received judicial recognition? (2)
In the sale of land to express tentative preliminary agreement to give the parties an opportunity to reflect / seek legal or other advice before entering a binding contract.
Examples of social, family and domestic agreements. (2)
Allocation of domestic chores and social arrangements to meet friends for a drink / meal.
Where have the courts shown a willingness to rebut the usual presumption? (1)
In relation to agreements made between spouses who were in the process of separating or are separated when the agreement was reached.
What does the case of JONES V PADAVATTON 1969 demonstrate? (3)
The difficulty of determining the issue of legal intention between family members.
The claimant and defendant were mother and daughter respectively.
There was an agreement to the effect that if the daughter gave up her very satisfactory pensionable job in the USA and came to London to read for the Bar with the intention of practising law in Trinidad ( mother lived ) the mother would pay an allowance of 200 $ a month to maintain her daughter and her small son while in England.
