Balfour v Balfour
Domestic agreements between spouses living together are presumed not to be intended to be legally binding.
Facts
Mr Balfour was a civil engineer employed by the government of Ceylon (now Sri Lanka). In 1915 he and his wife came to England on leave. When he returned to Ceylon, Mrs Balfour stayed in England on medical advice because of rheumatoid arthritis. Before leaving, Mr Balfour promised to pay her £30 a month as maintenance until she rejoined him. The couple later drifted apart and separated, and Mr Balfour stopped paying. Mrs Balfour sued him on the promise, and the trial judge found in her favour.
Legal principle
The Court of Appeal held that the promise was not legally enforceable. Agreements made between husband and wife in the ordinary course of married life are generally not intended to be legally binding, and the parties do not intend that they should be sued on. Atkin LJ said that the small courts of the home are better suited to such arrangements than the courts of law, and that the consideration given in such cases is the natural love and affection that counts for little in a court of law. The presumption against an intention to create legal relations in domestic agreements was not rebutted, because the agreement was made while the marriage was a happy one.
Related cases on intention to create legal relations
- Attrill v Dresdner Kleinwort Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 394, [2013] 3 All ER 607
- Baird Textile Holdings Ltd v Marks & Spencer plc [2001] EWCA Civ 274, [2002] 1 All ER (Comm) 737
- Blue v Ashley [2017] EWHC 1928 (Comm)
- Edwards v Skyways Ltd [1964] 1 WLR 349
- Esso Petroleum Co Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise [1976] 1 WLR 1
- Jones v Padavatton [1969] 1 WLR 328
- Jones v Vernon's Pools Ltd [1938] 2 All ER 626
- Kleinwort Benson Ltd v Malaysia Mining Corp Bhd [1989] 1 WLR 379
Studying contract law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
