Puneet Varma (Editor)

Jones v Padavatton

Updated on
Edit
Like
Comment
Share on FacebookTweet on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on Reddit
Decided
  
29 November 1968

End date
  
November 29, 1968

Jones v Padavatton httpsuploadwikimediaorgwikipediacommonsthu

Citation(s)
  
[1968] EWCA Civ 4, [1969] 1 WLR 328; All ER 616

Ruling court
  
Court of Appeal of England and Wales

Similar
  
Merritt v Merritt, Balfour v Balfour, Rose & Frank Co v JR Crom, Felthouse v Bindley, Pharmaceutical Society of GB v Boot

Jones v padavatton


Jones v Padavatton [1968] EWCA Civ 4 is a leading English decision on contract law. The decision demonstrates how domestic agreements, such as in between a mother and daughter, are presumed not to be legally binding unless there is clear intention.

Contents

Jones v padavatton 1969 2 all er 616


Facts

A mother, Mrs Violet Lalgee Jones, agreed with her daughter, Mrs Ruby Padavatton, that if she would give up her secretary job at the Indian embassy in Washington DC and study for the bar in England, the mother would pay maintenance (from Trinidad, East Indian descent). The mother gave monthly payments of 42 pounds and then bought a London house (moving out of a one-room flat in Acton to 181 Highbury Quadrant, Highbury) which she lived in and rented out. Then they had a quarrel while Mrs Padavatton was still completing her bar exams at Lincoln's Inn. The mother brought an action for possession of the house. The daughter argued there was a binding contract that she could stay.

Judgment

The Court held that there was no binding contract. Although there would have been a contract if it was not the domestic parties related, there was insufficient evidence to rebut the presumption against domestic arrangements.

References

Jones v Padavatton Wikipedia