Deck 4: Intention to Create Legal Relations

Question 1

An agreement between two commercial parties will usually be considered to demonstrate an intention to create legal relations?

Answer 1

True

Question 2

Explain the rule laid out by the Privy Council in Pao On v Yau Liu Long and when it will apply.

Answer 2

No Answer

Question 3

To what extent could it be argued that consideration is essentially identical to the concept of reliance?

Answer 3

No Answer

Question 4

Why is it important to know if there is an intention to create legal relations?

Question 5

In what situations would we automatically assume that there was an intention to create legal relations?

Question 6

In what situations would we automatically assume that there was not an intention to create legal relations?

Question 7

In what social situations or transactions might the law consider that there was an intention to create legal relations?

Question 8

Do the rules on intention to create legal relations make the mistake of assuming that commercial parties are fully aware of the law whilst assuming that non-commercial parties are not?

Question 9

To what extent, if at all, is the requirement that there be an intention to create legal relations one that the law really needs to impose?

Question 10

Does Sadler v Reynolds indicate a more nuanced approach to the question of whether parties have an intention to create legal relations?

Question 11

Would an agreement between friends to play a lottery together and share any winning equally be regarded as one demonstrating an intention to create legal relations?

Question 12

Should the Court of Appeal decision in Williams v Roffey be regarded as a great leap forward, preventing rigid rules getting in the way of business practice or an act of vandalism against rules that must remain intact?

Question 13

Why is past consideration not regarded as 'good' consideration?

Question 14

Are the rules on what can and cannot constitute valuable consideration sufficiently clear? If not, how might they be improved?

Question 15

An agreement between two non-commercial parties will usually be considered to demonstrate an intention to create legal relations?

Question 16

In Edmonds v Lawson Lord Bingham reiterated the principle that the intention to create legal relations must be ascertainted objectively?

Question 17

In Edwards v Skyways an ex gratia payment by the claimant's former employer was considered to be outside of the scope of their usual commercial activities and so lacked an intention to create legal relations.

Question 18

Cases such as Sadler v Reynolds indicate an acknowledgment that there are many existing and potential cases that exist in a 'grey area' between the purely commercial and purely domestic transactions

Question 19

In which case was an agreement to share the cost of commuting between colleagues held not to be legally binding?

A) Smythe v Motor Insurance Bureau
B) Woollard v Blythe
C) Coward v Motor Insurer' Bureau
D) Balfour v Balfour

Question 20

Balfour v Balfour concerned an agreement to pay for what?

A) To invest in shares in his absence
B) To cover the expenses of Balfour's wife
C) An outstanding bank loan
D) The cost of Balfour's wife travelling to Ceylon

Question 21

Sadler v Reynolds concerned an agreement to do what?

A) Write a memoir
B) Write an obituary
C) Promote a book
D) Create a website

Question 22

Esso Petroleum Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise concerned contracts for what?

A) Vouchers for free fuel
B) Commonwealth Games mugs
C) Olympic Games sticker books
D) World Cup commemorative 'coins'

Question 23

Which of the following cases evidence the general rule that contracts made in social and domestic situations are presumed not to create legal relations between the parties

A) Balfour v Balfour
B) Hyde v Wrench
C) Jones v Padavatton
D) Rogers v Parish

Question 24

What is the function of consideration?

Question 25

Why did Devlin, J., decide that the agreement in Parker v Clark was intended to be legally binding?

Question 26

Freda invites William to attend her birthday party. William agrees but afterwards he changes his mind. Would he be:

A) Liable for breach of contract?
B) Forced to attend?
C) Free to do as he pleases?
D) Obliged to compensate her?

Question 27

Anny is divorcing Mark and they agree that she keeps the family car, while he keeps the family bicycle. Would the agreement:

A) Be enforceable?
B) Not be enforceable?
C) Be considered pre-contractual?
D) Need to be in writing?

Question 28

Andrew and Ben, who have been friends for many years, make a contract for the sale of 10 kilos of cement. Would the agreement be enforceable?

A) Yes
B) No
C) Only if in writing
D) Only if witnessed

Question 29

In family and social arrangements there is:

A) A presumption in favour of enforceability
B) A presumption against enforceability
C) No requirement of certainty
D) No requirement of consideration

Question 30

Which case could you use to show that the presumption against the enforceability of agreements between family members can be rebutted?

A) Balfour v Balfour
B) Williams v Williams
C) Merritt v Merritt
D) Re McArdle

Question 31

If a contract does not expressly state that it is legally binding, and the parties disagree the court will:

A) Decide that the contract is never legally binding
B) Decide that the contract is always legally binding
C) Refer to the intention of the parties using an objective test
D) Refer to the intention of the parties using a subjective test

Question 32

A domestic arrangement is an agreement

A) Only between people who are related
B) Only between commercial parties
C) Between parties that are not necessarily related
D) Always between a company and an individual

Question 33

Liar Ltd as part of a promotional campaign offered a free manual shaver to any customer who bought their electric shaving machine between November and December 2008. Would their customers:

A) Be able to demand the manual shaver?
B) Not be able, because by saying 'free' Liar Ltd stated it had no intention to create legal relations?
C) Not be able, because promotional campaigns are not to be taken seriously?
D) Be able as promotional campaigns are binding?

Question 34

Would you be able to sue a newspaper if a free DVD promised to be included in the paper is missing?

A) No, as there is no intention to create legal relations
B) Yes, as there is intention to create legal relations
C) No, as promotional offers are not meant to be binding
D) Yes, as promotional offers are meant to be binding

Question 35

Which Act of parliament provides that collective agreements are presumed not to have been intended by the parties to be legally enforceable (except for legally binding agreements in writing)?

A) The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977
B) The Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
C) The Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1996
D) The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999

Question 36

The case of Simpkins v Pays (1955) involved a dispute relating to

A) An agreement for child maintenance
B) The winnings from a competition
C) An agreement between workmates to share the cost of transport to work
D) An ex gratia payment as part of a severance package