Jones v Vernon's Pools Ltd
A clause stating that an arrangement is binding in honour only prevents it from being enforced in the courts.
Facts
Mr Jones claimed that he had sent in a winning football pools coupon to Vernon's Pools, which denied receiving it. The coupon contained a clause stating that the arrangement, and any agreement relating to it, was not to give rise to any legal relationship or be legally enforceable, but was binding in honour only.
Legal principle
Atkinson J held that Mr Jones could not sue, because the clause showed that the parties did not intend to create legal relations, so there was no enforceable contract. Following Rose and Frank Co v JR Crompton & Bros Ltd, parties may agree that their arrangement will depend only on honour. Clauses of this kind became standard in football pools and similar arrangements.
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
- Balfour v Balfour [1919] 2 KB 571
- 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
- 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.
