BALFOUR V. BALFOUR
Court: Court of Appeal of England and Wales
Full Case Name: Balfour v Balfour
Date Decided: 25 June 1919
Judges: Atkin, Warrington, and Duke LJJ
Appellant: Mr. Balfour
Respondent: Mrs. Balfour
FACTS OF THE CASE
Mr. and Mrs. Balfour were a married couple who resided in Ceylon. Mr. Balfour was civil engineering who worked in Ceylon. In 1915 during Mr. Balfour’s work leave, the couple went to England, but in 1916 Mr. Balfour had to return to Ceylon due to the recommencement of his work. However, Mrs. Balfour could not return since she was diagnosed with rheumatic arthritis. Before the defendant sailed back to Ceylon the couple engaged in a verbal agreement wherein Mr. Balfour claimed that he would pay Mrs. Balfour £30 a month for her maintenance till she returns. As time passed, differences arose between the couple after which Mr. Balfour stated that they should stay apart. Gradually, he stopped making the payments. Therefore, the wife (plaintiff) sued the husband (the defendant) for not abiding by the verbal agreement that they had agreed upon.
Issue
- Was Mr. Balfour’s offer intended to be legally binding?
- Was there a valid contract between the two?
ARGUMENTS MADE FOR THE APPELLANT
The agreement was merely a domestic arrangement between the couple until the husband returned to England. There was no agreement made on their separation. Hence it was not contractually binding. Also, there was no consideration from the wife’s end. Hence, there was no contractual obligation from the appellant’s end.
ARGUMENTS MADE FOR THE RESPONDENT
The respondents argued that a contract might arise between a husband and wife, similarly as they would with any other person, therefore the wife was entitled to continue to receive the payments as per the verbal agreement that the couple engaged before Mr. Balfour left for Ceylon.
JUDGEMENT
Warrington LJ stated his opinion by mentioning that this was a friendly agreement. He stated that it can be determined by either expression or implication. There was no such contract that was made in express terms since the wife did not bargain for the amount of money that was provided to her. Due to which it is assumed that she was content with £30. Whereas, the husband implied that he would pay the money until he was in the position to do so. Hence he concluded that this is a domestic arrangement that is extremely trivial and cannot be taken to court. Moreover, the husband had no legal intention to enter into a legally binding contract since he was willing to pay the sum only until he was in the position to.
Duke LJ further stated a few crucial points. Firstly, the basis of their communication was their relationship, which cannot be put into a suit. Secondly, this agreement took place while they were living in amity and not separation. Lastly, there was no consideration moving from the wife to the husband, nor was there a promise made by the husband in the first place. Therefore, a contract was never formed.
Lastly, Atkin LJ stated that such agreements between the parties do not result in contracts within the meaning of that term in the law. The most common forms of agreements that do not constitute a contract appear to be that of a husband and wife. The consideration that obtains for them is that of love and affection, and therefore a non-performance by either one of the two must not lead to legal consequences.
The court held that there was no contract. It was merely a domestic arrangement between the husband and wife since the two parties did not intend to create legal relations.
Aishwarya Says:
I have always been against Glorifying Over Work and therefore, in the year 2021, I have decided to launch this campaign “Balancing Life”and talk about this wrong practice, that we have been following since last few years. I will be talking to and interviewing around 1 lakh people in the coming 2021 and publish their interview regarding their opinion on glamourising Over Work.
If you are interested in participating in the same, do let me know.
Do follow me on Facebook, Twitter Youtube and Instagram.
The copyright of this Article belongs exclusively to Ms. Aishwarya Sandeep. Reproduction of the same, without permission will amount to Copyright Infringement. Appropriate Legal Action under the Indian Laws will be taken.
If you would also like to contribute to my website, then do share your articles or poems at adv.aishwaryasandeep@gmail.com
We also have a Facebook Group Restarter Moms for Mothers or Women who would like to rejoin their careers post a career break or women who are enterpreneurs.