Act of commercial & legal

The judge may assume that the agreement between the parties is legally enforceable, the case is Carlil v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. the carbolic smoke ball company produce a smoked ball that contain chemical due to influenza epidemic in England in 1891. The company belief the smoked ball can prevent influenza and finally make an advertisement in newspaper and promising a reward of £100 to anyone used the smoked ball but still caught influenza. Then Elizabeth Crlil see the advertisement and try to use smoked ball for herself, but unfortunately Elizabeth Carlil caught influenza and claimed the money to the company. Therefore the company refuse to give the money. Was the promises aim to be legally enforceable. The court agreed the promises to be legally enforceable since, the company promises to give the money and it clearly say in the advertisement.

The judge may assured the agreement is legally binding. Emergenous v Greek Community of SA is the case. Emergenous get invited by the Greek orthodox community of sa to become the head of the Greek Orthodox in Australia for 23 years. The community agree to pay the salary to the Emergenous. But in the end of the appointment the community refuse to pay him. Was the contract intend to be legally binding? the court agreed the agreement is legally binding, because it involves the economic benefit.

The judge may assume that the intention of both parties is not legally enforceable. The case is Balfour v Balfour . Mr. Balfour work in Ceylon. Due to Ms. Balfour sickness, she have to stay in England and Mr. Balfour committed to give Ms. Balfour £30 monthly. However, Mr. and Ms. Balfour divorced. But Ms. Balfour still demand the money that Mr. Balfour promised. Is the both parties have intention to be legally enforceable? The magistrate agree the intention is not legally enforceable because Mr. Balfour unwilling to pay the money to Ms. Balfour

The judge may presumed the agreement between the spouse is not legally enforceable. Cohen v Cohen is the case. Before the spouse getting married, Mr. and Ms. Cohen have an agreement to give a dress allowance as much as £100 and paid in quarterly. The allowance is given until 1920. In 1923 Mr. and Ms. Cohen divorced. Ms. Cohen assume that Mr. Cohen owed her £278 for her dress allowance and want to claim that money. Is the agreement between parties legally enforceable? the agreement Is not legally enforceable because it just a discussion between couple and there is no legal consequences.

The judgw may assume the intention of the spouse is legally enforceable and can be rebutted. The case is Merit v Merit. Mr. and Ms. Merit get a loan from the bank to build a house and make into a joint ownership. Unfortunately, Mr. Merit have an affair with another woman and getting divorced with Ms. Merit. The both parties agree that Mr. Merit would paid all the loan then give the sole ownership to Ms. Merit and sign a letter. When all the debt is paid, Mr. Merit refuse to give the house. Is the agreement been rebutted? The magistrate agree the agreement is rebuttable.

The judge decided this act of commercial to be legally binding. Esso petroleum co ltd v commissioners of custom and excise is the case. Esso petroleum produce a coin that will be a “gift” to the customer to promote sales. But the commissioners ask Esso to purchase a tax for the coin because the commissioner assume that the coin is a part of a trade. Did Esso intended to be legally bound?