판결 이유
Agreements between spouses relating to their domestic arrangements are not contracts because the parties do not intend to create legal relations. There is a presumption against contractual intention in domestic and social agreements.
사실관계
Mr Balfour worked in Ceylon (Sri Lanka). His wife remained in England for health reasons. Before returning to Ceylon, Mr Balfour promised to pay his wife £30 per month maintenance. The couple later separated and Mr Balfour stopped paying. Mrs Balfour sued to enforce the agreement.
판결 요약
The Court of Appeal held that the agreement was not an enforceable contract. Atkin LJ held that agreements between husband and wife about domestic matters are not intended to create legal relations and therefore are not contracts. The parties did not contemplate that their arrangement would be subject to legal enforcement. This presumption can be rebutted where circumstances show a clear intention to be bound.
주요 인용문
"Each house is a domain into which the King's writ does not seek to run, and to which his officers do not seek to be admitted."
— Atkin LJ
"The common law does not regulate the form of agreements between spouses. Their promises are not sealed with seals and sealing wax."
— Atkin LJ
후속 처리
Consistently applied as establishing the presumption against intention to create legal relations in domestic agreements.
Distinguished in Merritt v Merritt [1970] where a separated couple's agreement was held to be legally binding, as the domestic presumption is weaker when the parties are no longer living together.