Argue that there is an oral contract - offer, acceptance and consideration. Breach of the contract would entitle Ashley to claim for remedies including specific performance.
Argue that there is an oral contract - offer, acceptance and consideration. Breach of the contract would entitle Ashley to claim for remedies including specific performance.
But the intention to create legal relation is an element that must be present in order for a contract to be legally binding. If following the general rule of intention to create legal relation,in social/domestic arrangement there'll be no intention. So is Ashley still entitled to the remedy?
But the intention to create legal relation is an element that must be present in order for a contract to be legally binding. If following the general rule of intention to create legal relation,in social/domestic arrangement there'll be no intention. So is Ashley still entitled to the remedy?
It is just a presumption that legal relations are not intended to be binding in such contexts (see Merritt v Merritt, where this presumption was rebutted). Therefore Ashley can make a case for it to be rebutted.