Intention to enter legal relations

Intention to enter legal relations
这一部分的假设、反证、区别和相关案例很重要，多花时间理解、记忆！
1）Intention to create legal relations:some agreements are not intended to be legally enforceable.
　　*The presumption is that domestic and social arrangements are not intended to be legally binding but evidence may rebut that presumption.
　　这里的假设是：家庭以及社交的安排并不规定为法定要遵守的，但如果油证据的话可以对其假设进行反驳；
　　* The usual presumption that agreements between spouses living happily together are not legally enforceable does not apply when they are about to separate, or have already separated.
　　通常的假设是：夫妻双方快乐地生活在一起时的协议是不被法律强制性执行的，但一旦他们要分局或者已经分居则不成立。
2）Commercial agreements：
　　*In ordinary commercial dealings there is a strong presumption that the parties intend them to be legally bingding.
　　通常来说，商业操作中的假设是相关方有强烈要依法执行的意愿；
　　Where an examination question asks about intention to create legal relations, deal with social or domestic arrangements and commercial arrangements separately.
　　当一个考试的问题考察关于建立法律关系时，处理社交的或家庭的安排要与处理商业操作分别开来。
　　在考试的时候要注意：写出每个的假设，再从题目中找寻证据或按照课本内容举例来对以上的假设进行辩驳即可。
　　比如：当一个协议是用社交性质的文字（常见于考试中）表述出来，假设是这种情况下没有建立法律关系的意愿。那么，这个假设可以用以下进行辩驳：
　　--当这里的相关方存在建立jointenterrise的证据，案例：Simpkins v Pays;
--当双方分居或离婚（如果是关于婚姻的情况），案例：Merritt v Merritt.
　Two categories of agreement: Domestic ; Social agreement, Commercial agreement
　　熟悉各自的presumption and rebutment
　　Domestic ; Social agreement cases: Balfour v Balfour 1919 =>not enforceable; Simpkins v Pays 1915 =>enforceable
　　Merritt v Merritt 1970 =>enforceable
　　Commercial agreement cases: Edwards v Skyways 1964 =>not enforceable
　　Rose ;Frank Co v Crompton Bros 1925
　　Jones v Vernons Pools Ltd 1938
　　注：一定要留意假设和是否enforceable