The case of Balfour v. Balfour (1919) addresses the enforceability of agreements between spouses and explores the concept of intention to create legal relations. The case involved a husband, Mr. Balfour, who had agreed to provide a monthly allowance to his wife, Mrs. Balfour, while he was working abroad. After their separation, Mrs. Balfour sought to enforce the agreement, claiming that Mr. Balfour had failed to make the payments.
IssuesThe Court held that the agreement between Mr. and Mrs. Balfour was not legally enforceable as a contract. The decision was based on the finding that the parties did not intend to create legal relations with their domestic agreement. The Court's ruling established that agreements of a personal nature between spouses are generally presumed not to have legal consequences unless there is clear evidence of the intention to create legal obligations.
This case laid the foundation for the legal reaction theory in contract law, which posits that an agreement's enforceability relies upon whether the parties intended to create legal relations.