Facts: A husband and wife agreed that the husband would pay the wife a certain amount of money every month because she was unable to work due to illness. They ended up splitting up. The wife sued him for not continuing the payments even though they had split up.

Held: The court of appeal held there was no contract. Two judges said there was no consideration, but Atkin LJ said that these sorts of domestic agreements are never intended to be legally binding so can never be contractual

Facts: A worker gave a co-worker a lift to work on his bike, and it was agreed he would give money to him once in a while for doing so

Held: There was no intention to enter a legal relation, so there was no contract

Facts: A petrol station offered a ‘world cup coin’ for every 4 gallons of petrol bought by a customer

Held: The court held that this was a commercial undertaking/agreement, so there was a contract

⇒ Lord Simon: “Esso and the garage proprietors put the material out for their commercial advantage, and designed it to attract the custom of motorists”. So, although Esso does not directly gain an advantage of giving away coins, they were clearly doing it for a commercial advantage (i.e. to get more customers)

Facts: There was a Trade Union agreeent with employers. For the individual the agreement has no legal effect - so as an employee you cannot rely on collective labour agreement; you have to sue based on your own contract of employment.

Held: In this case the court held you cannot rely on collective labour agreement – they are intended to have no legal effect

Facts: In this case, the automatic presumption of a legally binding relation in a commercial contract was successfully rebutted. The claimant and the defendant contracted for the supply of goods. The contract stated it would never be a legal agreement. When the defendant terminated the agreement early, the claimant claimed the defendant was in breach of contract

Held: It was held there was no legally binding relation; to say there had been a legally binding relation would frustrate the parties intentions.

⇒ “This arrangement is not entered into as a formal agreement, and shall not be subject to legal jurisdiction in the Law Courts but is only a definite expression and record of the purpose and intention of the parties concerned to which they each honourably pledge themselves.”

Facts: Three people often entered a newspaper competition. They entered a competition on the same form, which was sent in by the defendant. One of the 3 won £750, which was received by the defendant. The claimant sued the defendant to get a third of the prize money

Held: It was held that there was evidence they would split the prize money if any of the 3 won, which was an intention to be legally binding

⇒ Compare this case with Wilson v Burnett [2007]

Facts: 3 women won £100,000 and it was said they had agreed to split any prize over £10 between them

Held: It was held that there was not enough evidence to suggest she would share the money; there had been no formal agreement