Law Assignment

confusedalot

Hey ppl i need your help plze!

Gotta do an assignment for colege on contract law and i havent a clue where to start....it would be greatly appreciated if ye could just read through it and leave a comment on what you think the outcome should be......cheers

Assignment-

Casey promised his son James that if he returned from San Francisco he would pay his accomodation costs in London if he stayed in Kings Inn in order to qualify as a Barrister. Casey also agrees to pay for James' fees for the Kings Inn.
James has falied all of his exams for the past 3 years. Casey and James has a major disagreement about James' drug habit such that Casey has stopped paying James' accomodation costs.
Advise James as to whether he has an enforceable contract.

All opinions greatly appreciated as i have no got a clue as im studying business and law is one of the modules that i have to cover :rolleyes:

looksee

Ok, I don't know the first thing about contract law, so I advise you to ignore this, but I want to see if I guess right (if anyone else replies)

The contract didn't mention drugs or lifestyle in any way, so that is irrelevant. Unless there is some sort of ruling that you cannot take drugs while training to be a Barrister. Casey also undertook to pay the accommodation costs but did not specify for how long or under what circumstances, just 'to qualify as a barrister'.

However, the only bit of law I remember from my secretarial course donkeys years ago was the bit about 'consideration' which means there are two sides to a contract. Casey's was to pay up, James was presumably to qualify as a barrister. Or was it just to live in Kings Inns while he was studying. How many goes at the exams do you get?

On balance I would say that Casey's obnoxious and idle son will probably win the case.

Edit: PS you will get a lot less slagging if you use standard English to ask college homework questions

Thinfin

This is similar to Jones v Padavatton.

The courts usually assume that there is no intention to create legal relations in family / domestic situations. The son's side would have to rebut this presumption to successfully claim there is an enforceable contract.

Also consideration is reciprocal - both sides must provide something of value for the promise to be binding. The son has shown no good consideration. Check Jones v Padavatton.

confusedalot

Thank you so much...this has been a great help