ICLR

Question 1

ICLR LAyout

Answer 1

• intro court will only enforce agreements where the parties intended to create a contract which has legal consequences. Whether the parties intended to enter into legally binding relations is an issue to be determined objectively. Each case will be decided on its own facts. + 2 Presumptions
• each agreement = starting presumption
• rebuttal evidence and burden (commercial -> party arguing that’s the agreement was bit kegally binding) (domestic ->. Party arguing it was)
• conclusion

Question 2

• presumption social and domestic agreements

Answer 2

• not to create contract, so will not usually be enforceable
• Balfour v Balfour - married not legally binding
• Jones v Padavatton - No ICLR mother and daughter

Question 3

• social and domestic rebuttal

Answer 3

• evidence on party seeking to prove there was an intention must provide clear evidence
• financial security at risk (Parker v Clark)
• Family breakdown (Merritt V Merritt)
• 3rd Party involved (Simpkins v Pays) -> money changed hands?
• real purpose of agreement is commercial (Snelling v Snelling)

Question 4

Presumption commercial and business agreements

Answer 4

• presumed intend
• Edwards v Skyward
• Carllil v CSB
• McGowan v Radio Buxton (free gifts/prizes are offered to promote a business)

Question 5

Rebuttal of commercial presumption

Answer 5

• Burden of evidence = Party who argues there isn’t ICLR
• honourable pledges cannot be enforced (Jones V Vernon Pools)
• letters of comfort -> reassure not create legal relations (Klemwort-Benson v Malaysia Mining)