courts need to see legal intent, rather than rely on general matter of trust. law based on presumptions and is split between social/domestic agreements and business/commercial agreements
Domestic / social arrangements presumption
there is noITCLR as these contracts are made with love and affection (Balfour V Balfour, Jones V Padavatton, Buckpitt V Oates)
Domestic / social arrangements rebuttal
clear evidence needed
could be if money was exchanged, there was an expectation of payment or if the V relied on the contract and performed to their detriment
(Merritt V Merritt, Simpkins V Pays, Parker V Clark )
Business / commercial transactions presumption
There is ITCLR as one party is usually benefitting from money
(Edwards V Skyways, EssoVCustoms + Excise, McGowan V RadioBuxton)
Business / commercial transactions rebuttal
clear evidence needed
could be through tightly worded honourable pledge clause
terms like ex gratia = too vague and will not amount to rebuttal
if wording in comfort letter showed no legal intent
