Welcome

Pullan v Koe [1913] 1 Ch 9

ResourcesPullan v Koe [1913] 1 Ch 9

Facts

  • Miss Pullan, the plaintiff, was the daughter of Mr. Koe, the defendant.
  • Prior to her marriage, Mr. Koe promised Miss Pullan an annual allowance of £100, contingent upon her marrying.
  • Miss Pullan relied on this promise when she entered into the marriage.
  • After her marriage, Mr. Koe did not fulfill his promise to pay the allowance.
  • Miss Pullan brought a legal claim against Mr. Koe to enforce the promise.

Issues

  1. Whether a father's promise to provide a financial allowance to his daughter, made in contemplation of her marriage, constituted valid consideration under English contract law.
  2. Whether such a promise was intended to create legal relations or was merely a moral or social obligation.
  3. Whether the promise was sufficiently clear and specific to be legally enforceable.

Decision

  • The court held that Mr. Koe’s promise did not constitute valid consideration under English law.
  • It was found that the promise was made in a family context, giving rise to a presumption against an intention to create legal relations.
  • The court determined there was no clear evidence of a legally binding agreement.
  • The promise was regarded as too vague and lacking necessary specificity for contractual enforceability.
  • The claim brought by Miss Pullan was dismissed.
  • Marriage consideration may constitute valid consideration if the promise is clear, specific, and intended to create legal relations.
  • In family or domestic arrangements, there is a presumption against the intention to create legal relations.
  • Moral or social obligations, without more, do not give rise to enforceable contracts.
  • Clear evidence of intention and specificity of terms are required for contract formation, even in the context of marriage.

Conclusion

Pullan v Koe [1913] 1 Ch 9 clarified that promises made in contemplation of marriage require both a clear intention to create legal relations and specificity to be enforceable as contracts; mere moral obligations within a familial context are insufficient for legal enforcement.

Assistant

Responses can be incorrect. Please double check.