November 7, 2024
DU LLBLaw of ContractSemester 1

Balfour V Balfour ( 1918 − 19) ALL ER 860 ( CA) Case Analysis

CitationBalfour V Balfour ( 1918 − 19) ALL ER 860 ( CA) Case Analysis
Keywords
Factsa couple went to England on leave. For health reasons the wife was unable to accompany the husband again to Ceylon (Husband’s place of work).

The husband promised to pay 30 pounds per month to his wife as maintenance, but he failed to pay.

The husband was held not liable, as there was as no intention to create legal relationship
Issues
Contentions
Law PointsSection 25(1) of ICA 1872- Agreement without consideration is void, unless, it was not expressed in writing and registration on account of love and affection
Section 10 of ICA 1872 – What agreements are contract

All agreement are contract if they are made by
the free consent of parties competent to contract
for lawful consideration
and with a lawful object
and are not hereby expressly declared to be void.

Nothing herein contained shall affect any law in force in India and not hereby expressly repealed by which any contract is required to be made in writing or in the presence of witness or any law relating to the registration of documents.
Here no intention to make contract

it was not expressed in writing and registration on account of love and affection


No bargain
No intention to make it a contract

Consideration Some right − profit − benefit − forbearance − loss − responsibility given or suffer

The consideration, as we know, may consist either in some right, interest, profit, or benefit accruing to one party, or some forbearance, detriment, loss, or responsibility given, suffered, or undertaken by the other.

Parties did not intend that they should be attended by legal consequences
Consideration obtains − natural love & affection
Judgment
Ratio Decidendi & Case Authority

Full Case Details

To do

Related posts

Mahabir Kishore v. State of Madhya Pradesh AIR 1990 SC 313

vikash Kumar

Gurcharan Singh v. State (Delhi Admn.) (1978) 1 SCC 118 : AIR 1978 SC 179

Tabassum Jahan

Commissioner of Sales Tax, U. P. v. Madan Lal Das AIR 1977 SC 523

vikash Kumar

Leave a Comment