This case deals with the intention to create legal relations in contract law.
- Mr. Balfour and Mrs. Balfour were a married couple who lived in Sri Lanka (then Ceylon).
- In 1916, they went to England on leave. However, due to Mrs. Balfour’s health issues, she remained in England while Mr. Balfour returned to Sri Lanka.
- Before leaving, Mr. Balfour promised to send his wife £30 per month for her maintenance.
- Over time, their relationship broke down, and Mr. Balfour stopped sending the money.
- Mrs. Balfour sued him, claiming that he had breached their agreement.
Final Order (Judgment)
The Court of Appeal ruled in favor of Mr. Balfour, holding that:
- Agreements between spouses are generally not legally enforceable because they lack the intention to create legal relations.
- This was a domestic arrangement, not a legally binding contract.
- Mutual promises in a personal relationship (such as between spouses) do not usually create enforceable contracts unless there is clear intent.
Conclusion
Since the agreement was a domestic understanding, not a contract, Mrs. Balfour could not enforce it in court. This case became a landmark ruling in contract law, reinforcing the principle that social and domestic agreements are generally not legally binding unless proven otherwise.
