Social Or Domestic Agreement
Although conjecture is no longer used, in reality, in most national or social agreements, the parties generally do not intend to forge legal ties, at least if the agreement is reached when relations are harmonious. As a result, an applicant is likely to face an increasing struggle that proves his intent in such cases. Commercial transactions confirm a strong presumption of a valid contract: these agreements, in which the parties act as if they were foreigners, are considered binding. However, the “honour clauses” in the “gentlemen`s agreements” are recognized as an honest intention to create legal relations, as in the Jones/Vernons pools (where the clause “This agreement is binding only in honour” was effective). You have to be careful not to be able to write a clause to try to exclude the jurisdiction of a court, because the clause is null and void, as in Baker/Jones.  If a contract has both an “honour clause” and a clause that attempts to exclude the jurisdiction of a court (as in Rose – Frank v Crompton) , the court may apply the blue pencil rule that excludes the insulting party. The court will then recognize the rest, if it still makes sense, and will remain in agreement with the parties` negotiations. The insulting clause was as follows: in 1919, Lord Atkin at Balfour against Balfour (where a husband promised his wife to pay child support while working in Ceylon) stated that there was no “intention to be legally bound” while the wife relied on payments. The judge found that spousal agreements would generally not be legally enforceable: Sadler/Reynolds (2005) suggests, however, that there may be situations that fall into a kind of “half-house” between business and business, which undermines the burden of presumption.
In this case, there was an alleged contract between a journalist and a businessman who was a friend. The journalist wanted to write the businessman`s autobiography “rags to rich” and share the profits. Instead, the businessman chose another author. The judge suggested that the oral agreement fell “somewhere between a patently commercial case and a social exchange.” It is necessary to prove to the journalist that there is an intention to establish legal relations “although the obligation is less onerous than that which would be necessary to establish such an intention in the context of a purely social relationship”.